U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
Crude just opened at $130/barrel. It’s now trading at $125. Imagine where it will be if they actually ban Russian oil.
I still don’t see why they’d ban it. Just penalize Russian oil, so the Russians only net $40/barrel (or whatever) instead of $125.
Supply chains getting worse, lots worse.
On oil,
First on energy trade, signs of stress emerged as Russian oil companies found it increasingly difficult to hire seaborne tankers to carry oil supplies out of Russia. The threat of further western sanctions was enough to curtail western banks’ willingness to finance Russian oil freight, while insurers ceased underwriting delivery risk and some western countries closed their ports to tankers carrying Russian oil supplies. At the same time, several western oil companies announced their intent to divest Russian oil assets. While, larger production and trade disruptions would occur if Russian natural gas supply to the EU drops, the impact on global oil prices of these smaller disruptions are not immaterial. We estimate these issues could reduce available global oil supply by around 5m barrels per day (or around 5% of global consumption). And last week, they coincided with a $10 appreciation in the global crude oil futures benchmark to roughly $115 per barrel, which will raise inflation and suppress growth of oil importing countries, including Europe.
On supply chains,
Meanwhile, evidence of larger trade disruptions in non-energy product markets also started to emerge. While Russia and Ukraine make up a relatively small portion of global trade (roughly 2%), a larger portion of global trade passes through Russia and Ukraine on its way to Europe. Specifically, we estimate around 6% of EU containerized freight is shipped through Russia on rail lines operated by Russian entities impacted by western sanctions. At the time of this writing, Chinese producers were reportedly cancelling these rail shipments and rerouting the goods through ocean routes. However, with seaborne freight markets already incredibly tight, these rail disruptions will likely increase product lead times, drag growth and increase production costs. Our understanding is that auto and industrial parts will be particularly impacted. And this is coming at a time when European auto makers have already started to announce factory interruptions as a result of a shortage of Ukrainian produced wire harnesses, which are needed to safely bundle cables in vehicles. These European production issues will have a negative impact on US auto imports and inventories at a time when the sector was already reeling from the semiconductor shortage.
Higher gas prices incoming. These are going to be old news fast, and they weren’t good to begin with,
Just remember - Putin will “never gain the hearts and souls of the Iranian people.” 
“We’re from the government, and we’re here to help”
SCHUMER SAYS U.S. DEMOCRATS SEEK $1 BLN IN NEW FTC FUNDING TO ‘CRACK DOWN’ ON COMPANIES THAT ‘GOUGE’ CONSUMERS IN OIL, GAS, MEDICINE AND OTHER SECTORS -LETTER TO COLLEAGUES
If oil prices rise 30% in a week and you raise your prices, you’re gouging clearly. Your shareholders should patriotically subsidize our midterm re-election chances by selling at a loss to keep costs down for likely voters.
Possibly already too late to order those Matryoshka dolls?
Not to worry.
These days they’re probably made in China, like everything else!
I dont understand why anyone would be complaining about gas prices, anyways? Everyone insists we should be virtuous, and this is merely a direct consequence of that virtue. The only solution is to not shoot yourself in the foot over principles to begin with.
Is anyone else not surprised that the Democrat solution to higher prices is to spend another billion dollars just to try to figure out why prices have gotten so high?
Current estimates place at seventy-five the number of Senate votes in favor of halting Russian oil imports into the USA. That is a REMARKABLE number!
Possibly equally remarkable, Nancy Pelosi is also in favor of this measure. Only the ultra-fringe left is opposed. Sadly, that includes President Joe Biden.
It isnt remarkable, it’s the world we live in - we dont like what the Russians are doing, so it would somehow be endorsing them if we were to continue doing business with them. The fact we’d be doing business with them solely to meet our own needs is irrelevant. Expressing indignation with others is far more important than acting in your own best interest.
What is remarkable is that the remaining 25% have not [yet] been branded as communist-sympathizing traitors. Being (I presume) mostly Republican, they’re obviously jsut trying to curry favor with Trump by protecting his buddy Putin. Couldnt possible be they simply understand that their constituents cant afford the higher gas prices (and other prices) that’ll inevitably come from such an action.
The republicans have a free roll on this position - if Biden refuses, he’s weak on Russia and foreign policy generally. If he goes along, he spikes gas prices and hurts Americans’ wallets so he gets hit on the domestic front.
Another record for grain prices. The wheat etf WEAT ran out of shares to sell, and you can’t buy wheat futures since they’re limit up for day 5 now with no sellers.
*CHICAGO WHEAT SETTLES AT RECORD $12.94/BUSHEL ON SUPPLY FEARS
Sad thing is, the actual farmers wont see much, if any, of that high price…
Well, they would if they were unhedged, but if they already sold grain futures to lock in a small profit, they’re going to get a margin call for their trouble.
Peabody Energy (BTU), one of the coal giants, had hedged their coal mining delivery and with coal prices way up, they had to take a 10% loan from Goldman to meet the margin calls on their hedges in the meanwhile before they actually get all the coal mined and delivered.
Prices at the pump rise as fast as oil & gasoline futures (which is before the futures actually cost the pump operators anything), but they don’t go down as fast when futures drop. Is that not price gouging?
If they’re hedged for delivery, they lose money as the futures rise before they sell anything. See the $150M margin call BTU got even before they sold / delivered their coal.
I don’t know the exact details of how the gas stations work, but I suspect whoever’s delivering their gas is hedged against gas prices, so they raise the gas delivery prices in line with current gas prices or else they’d be losing money whenever gas futures (or oil futures indirectly) rise. That’s a lot of risk, given even the normal volatility of commodity prices, so I’m sure it’s hedged somewhere up the line and then everyone downstream gets prices that adjust promptly.
This implies they’re not losing money when futures go up. But it also implies they’re making a killing when futures go down. No?
Well Peabody is going to pay $45M worth of interest if they need that Goldman loan for the next 3 years, so that’s a cost even if their hedges mean they locked in their sale price. So price volatility can require more hedging capital than you expected, raise the interest costs of hedging capital, etc.
I suppose someone in the chain does better as the gas prices fall, but whether that happens as often or as quickly as prices spikes, or how fast they pass along the price changes, I’m not sure. Maybe those things partially offset, whether that’s more or less than enough, I don’t know.
Running oil back up
