Feels like every day for three months there's a piece about how tomorrow the price of gas is going $200/barrel. It never does though. Gas may just be a lot more elastic now than it was 50 years ago, or even 3 years ago. I have no idea, but I'll believe it when I see it.

▲

vannevar a day ago | parent | next [-]

I haven't seen any articles saying "tomorrow" oil is going to $200/barrel. I have seen lots of articles predicting that once the stocks run out, the price will go to $200/barrel. The articles differ on exactly when that will happen. But seems like it's closer now than it was a month ago. People who are downstream of a stock, and have never experienced that stock running out, will not believe that it can run out until they see it. In the past, someone has always come along and refilled it before it hit zero. Maybe some deus ex machina will arrive to refill it again. Hard to see what that will be this time, though.

▲

matthewdgreen a day ago | parent | prev [-]

It's a lot more interesting to actually look at the mechanisms, then just to play "I'll believe it when I see it." Right now there are huge drawdowns of storage capacity in the US and Europe and China. Those have finite lifespans, although China has a lot of storage (120 days at 2025 rates.) Also, Chinese refiners have stopped processing as much fuel. Lastly, there's been a big reduction in consumption of transport fuels (again, mostly in China). These have combined to reduce prices in the US and take China off the buying market, so we're seeing lower prices than you might expect.

But this stuff won't last forever. If the Hormuz blockage doesn't resolve, things will get bad. You're seeing a patient that's a little more resilient than we thought, but who is mostly being carried through by massive blood transfusions. This buys time, but does not heal the patient.

▲

pkulak a day ago | parent | next [-]

> It's a lot more interesting to actually look at the mechanisms

Yes, and that's why I read TFA. And it was interesting. My point still stands, however, that every previous doom prediction has been wrong.

▲

0cf8612b2e1e 21 hours ago | parent [-]

All of the predictions I see are of the type, “If nothing changes and reserves are depleted, prices will spike to very high levels.” We have yet to bottom out reserves, so yeah, prices have yet to hit record levels, but we are moving there day by day. There was a lot of slack oil in the system before this started, but it can only last so long.

	▲	pkulak 16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Well, the markets sure don't think so, and they are betting with their money, not words. WTI is about 80 bucks right now. Barely above average.

▲

wilkommen a day ago | parent | prev [-]

How is China reducing the consumption of transport fuels? Is that driven by changes in individuals' fuel consumption patterns or by a change on the industrial side?

	▲	vannevar 21 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Another article from the other day contains this: And even more importantly, China has slashed its crude imports, turning instead to massive stockpiles. (https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/09/business/oil-strait-of-hormuz...) Sounds like they're burning through their reserves as well. But since China's economy is more centrally controlled, it's likely they keep bigger reserves.
	▲	RetroTechie 21 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		China's agressive ramp-up of EVs has progressed to where it causes a noteable dent in gasoline demand. Which iirc peaked a while ago. Of course there's plastics & other uses. But China has gone big on renewables & battery tech as you know. It definitely helps.