Despite Iran's Attacks, Gulf Oil Exports Exceed Prewar Levels

It all makes sense when you realize Kpler's head of crude oil analysis is a hardcore Iranian monarchist.

Looking at the title and just hearing news from the strait and gas prices, it’s obvious they are not saying these barrels reached anywhere in the same amount.

I don’t know you figure there’s double counting from that article: the shuttles to Fujairah are transiting the strait.

I’m also dubious about the gross figures but I do think it’s an interesting possibility (if they are correct then there’s an uncharacteristic overshoot in pricing, which seems suspicious). But ppl in the industry seem to take Kpler seriously — I just saw them at Gastech last month.

I can’t find the referenced report (it could be just a subscriber note) but here’s a blog entry on how they count: https://www.kpler.com/blog/explainer-the-nuances-of-reading-...

We need to move the global economy off fossil fuels and and an opex-driven fuel system in general. Fortunately that shift is finally well under way, except in the US.

Kpler is a commercial data broker, not a political institution; they have no incentive to lie to their customers. Where are you seeing the article double counting ship transfers? The article doesn't try to do any math, it just cites Kpler. If 8.5Mb is current pipeline capacity, is it possible there could be other overland shipments making up the remaining 1.5Mb?

It's interesting, something struck me as off about the analysis. I mean it could well be true but the price of oil and VLCC daily rates suggest it probably isn't.

There's a tonne of articles resharing this Kpler analysis. The closest to corroboration I could find was references to Marisks and Vortexa data.

This Russian site[0] quotes the following:

> Oil flows from Persian Gulf producers excluding Iran rebounded to more than 81% of pre-war levels in September, averaging 19.2m barrels per day against about 23.6m bpd in the year before the regional conflict began on 28 February, according to Vortexa.

But assuming that analysis is paywalled I can't find it anywhere, and the article also relies on the Kpler analysis extensively.

Marisks is just about ship movements so doesn't really add anything to the picture. All that to say, it may well be true but the current story and way it is being propagated seem fishy.

[0]: https://en.portnews.ru/news/397951

A caveat to the below: the region is still at war.

Oil demand is inflexable when considering the demand has rarely been based around refilling reserves and pricing hasn't been determined by the insurance houses. Strategic reserves are depleted across the globe, china in particular.

Even with those releases of reserves, economies/markets relying on diesel went into limp mode due to the FUD about war. For many months there was complete uncertainty about who insures the insurers. So, now these economies need to catch up. (not forgetting, the globe is still "at war" and the messaging is up and down.)

Anyways, The first priority to return to pre-war oil economy is to refill those reserves and exit limp mode. Pricing will not go down in a predictable trend until that happens, and even at >pre-war production levels, that will take decades to get back due to the "squeeze" cost.

And it takes a lot of money to pay a crew to risk their ship in the strait.

Yep. I also like the phrase "money always goes to where it's treated the best"

It's difficult to take Sal seriously these days.

"What is happening with US Sealift command?"

"what has happened to american shipping?"

"Why are american port automations ruining economies?"

"why is "program ___" costing so much?"

Well, Sal. It might just have something to do with the leadership you voted for.