Venezuela’s End: The Oil Question

Photo of black oil barells

Venezuela only has one realistic path forward: Oil. That doesn’t mean it’s a sure thing, though. So, let’s lay it all out.

Most production comes from the Orinoco Belt, but it’s complex and expensive crude. Without foreign investment and involvement, this is a no-go. The Lake Maracibo region offers lighter, easier-to-refine oil, with better export access and infrastructure. However, this is a bit of a lawless region, so it would necessitate lots of troops in addition to any investment.

Russia and China come out of this as clear losers, but some US refiners are going to take a hit, too. This isn’t the energy-security play that the US is looking for or needs. Venezuela has likely seen its last days as a major energy producer.

Full 12 minute analysis available exclusively on Patreon below:

Transcript

Hey, all Peter Zeihan here coming from Colorado. Today we’re going to talk about Venezuela. But from perhaps a positive scenario point of view. The core issue is oil. That’s where all the money comes from. And if you’re going to reconstruct the country in any form, that’s where it’s going to be able to pay for itself. I really don’t see the Trump administration dumping $100 billion and regenerating the infrastructure. 

So let’s talk about what’s necessary and why and how it might might happen. Venezuelan crude falls today into two general categories. The first chunk, the chunk that is responsible for about 80% of the production is a place called the Orinoco Belt, which is down in the Amazon. It is not crude in the technical term. It’s something called Bitterman, which requires incredible amounts of energy and steam injection to liquefy it enough that you can bring it to the surface, and then you run it through something called an upgrader, which is kind of like a refinery, just to make it liquid enough to be stable for shipment. 

And then you have to inject something called diluted into it. So again, it can flow, and then you pump it north to the coast, where it’s loaded for export. This makes it the most expensive crude in the world per barrel produced and requires incredible technical acumen to function. Historically speaking, most of the work on the Upgraders, has come from US multinationals a little bit from, say, total in France. 

Schlumberger, Baker Hughes, all of those, oil services firms were heavily involved in the development of the program. And eventually they trained at PDVSA, which are PDVSA, which is the state oil company, to do a lot of the work. But that kind of came to a crashing halt back in 2002, when we first had a political coup against Chavez, followed by kind of an economic resistance against the professionals within PDVSA. 

When that process was over and Chavez re consolidated control over the country, he purged PDVSA. And what we found out was basically everyone who had an engineering degree didn’t like the guy and joined in the coup, and so he got rid of all of them. And since then we’ve had a steady degradation of what PDVSA can do. It’s no longer one of the most capable oil companies in the world. 

It’s barely holding together. And if it wasn’t for the presence of U.S. super major Chevron in some of these projects, most of them probably would have shut down, in order to get the Orinoco back up to what it could be. So it’s producing one 2 million barrels a day. You’re talking about investment, at least in the tens of billions, probably closer to 200, because there’s several stages to this process. 

Think of it kind of like what the Canadians do with oil sands, but remove easy capital access, remove the skilled labor, remove the rule of law, remove the physical pipeline linking it to the world’s largest consumer market. They have to do this all in the Amazon, more or less by themselves, without cash, but still bringing in foreigners. 

Very, very expensive projects. And I think the most likely outcome is that this is going to eventually fall down to zero, because they’re simply not going to be able to maintain it. The second part of the Venezuelan oil complex is a little bit more interesting from a functional point of view, if not a chemistry point of view, and that is the Lake Maracaibo region. 

Now, Lake Maracaibo is a large bay in the western part of the country and Zulia State that is connected to the Caribbean that has a mix of onshore and offshore production. If you go back to the mid 1990s, it was producing somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million barrels a day, which was the majority of Venezuelan oil production. And it is kind of a medium light mix instead of the Biderman that exists over in, southern Venezuela. 

As a result, produce production is a lot more basic. The geography is a lot more friendly, and most of the physical infrastructure to process the crude actually exists locally. There’s a large complex that technically could process about a million barrels a day, whereas Venezuela barely processes anything of that of the stuff that comes out of the Orinoco. But most importantly, you know, the Orinoco is basically asphalt, and so getting asphalt out of the ground is a bit of a bitch. 

Whereas the stuff in Orinoco again, light, medium, sweet, much easier to process. And the export options because it is on the water are much easier as well if there’s a solution here. For Venezuela, it lies in the Maracaibo region. A couple reasons. Number one, there is a line of the Andes that cuts the Maracaibo region and Zulia from eastern and central Venezuela. 

And so there’s always been kind of a semi secessionist view of the world compared to Caracas. So Caracas is a Republican project that was formed after the collapse of the Spanish empire, very anti-colonial, very pro-independence. But Zulia and Maracaibo are more like a post-imperial remnant who never really fully bought into the Caracas project. And while they’re not secessionist in the traditional sense, they definitely feel that they’ve been robbed blind by Caracas government, not just under Maduro and Chavez, but all the governments have come before, all the way back to the Spanish breakup. 

So I can easily see a devolution of the state of Venezuela or Western. Venezuela under Maracaibo kind of goes one way and Caracas goes the other way. Caracas falls apart, Maracaibo is more stable. And that’s before you consider things like the United States getting involved, because if you are an American energy company, the Mark region is a far more friendly environment to operate in than the Orinoco. 

You don’t have to deal with the jungle. You don’t have to do the interior. You don’t have to deal with the capital. You don’t have to deal with, you know, to fight the geography. Everything’s just easier. But easier is not the same thing as easy. Because this is a region that has been denigrated by Caracas for decades. 

Centuries, almost. It’s not a great place, especially right now. Civil control and law enforcement has largely collapsed. You have organized crime, gangs running rampant through the area. The Trump administration said that the Caracas government was facilitating drug shipment to the United States. 

Maybe that was true, but there’s a lot more going through, more Acabo. Maracaibo also has literal pirates like Arg and Eyepatch, that basically raid the entire area. All the time. So if, if, if you’re going to have an economic renaissance in Venezuela or even just one in Maracaibo, in Zulia, first thing you have to do is secure the area and reestablish law. 

And because Venezuela is not a naval power, you’ve got Maracaibo city on the far north side of Lake Maracaibo and the rest of the population of Zulia on the south side. You’re now basically talking about occupying, stabilizing two disconnected sections. So you’re talking about tens of thousands of troops. If you want to make this happen. But that is still the low hanging fruit in this question. 

So much easier than Orinoco, even with all those complications. So let’s talk winners and losers. Most likely this isn’t going to work. Most likely we’re seeing the beginning of the end of Venezuela as an energy producer at all. First loser is, of course, Russia. The Russians bring no technology whatsoever to this fight. Basically their presence was geopolitical. 

To stick it to the Americans, that goes down to zero. They’ll lose absolutely everything that they put in. Second biggest loser is China. China has spent the last 25 years expanding its refining complex to run crude, different kinds of crude from different parts of the world, including Venezuela. The idea being that eventually they’re going to have a fight with the United States. 

And the more diversity they have for options, the better. And so they have sunk tens of billions of dollars into Venezuela to basically prepay for crude. And right now they are owed about 15 to $20 billion in Venezuelan crude. That is now all complete right off. In addition, the refineries that they have built in Shandong and near Shanghai to specifically process Venezuelan crude, they have now lost their only source of crude. 

They will not get it back. So this has been a huge risk for the Chinese that now is being manifested as a complete loss. Other big losers. It really depends upon what happens with the oil sector. If I’m right and this all goes away, then the biggest loser is probably the refineries in the US Gulf Coast region. 

A lot of them were designed to run on this sort of crude, and it’s just going to stop. They can still use, Canadian crude, but the price differential is not going to be as favorable if Venezuelan crude falls off the market altogether. So even if they can replace all the barrels they need, the cost per barrel is going to rise, and that’s going to force them to take a more diverse type of crude. 

And that means less heavy and more sweet. Keep in mind that the U.S shale industry produces exclusively super sweet, super light. So we’ve been in this weird position in U.S. refining for the last several years, where the refiners on the Gulf prefer to take Venezuelan Canadian crude and the United States exports its light sweet to the rest of the world. 

All we need to do is switch that so that we process our own. But that’s easier said than done. If you’ve spent a few billion dollars upgrading your refinery to run the heavy stuff. Heavy crude is typically used for things like asphalt, industrial products and diesel, whereas light sweet crude is usually used for gasoline consumer products. anyone who’s in refining will tell you that is the short story and hides a lot of nuance. I agree, but this is not a video about that. Winners in that scenario, of course, are Canada, because one of the problems that Canada has been having is it sells most of its crude into the American market. 

The American market is the most super saturated energy market in the world. And anything coming out of the Caribbean, Venezuela goes to the US Gulf. So they’ve basically been selling at a massive discount, but sometimes it’s $25 a barrel that now closes and should allow the Canadians to get a better leg up. And that’s before you consider that they have a pipeline that’s kind of sort of working, shipping crude to their West coast now. 

All right. What am I leaving out here? This isn’t an energy security play for the United States. I know a lot of people said that the United States was doing it for oil. And Trump is all about oil. United States is the world’s largest producer of crude. We export 5 million barrels a day of refined product, which is significantly more in refined product than Venezuela ever, ever exported in terms of raw crude. 

So while there might be an economic play here for Exxon and Chevron in the rest, if if the country stabilizes the investment required to make it stabilized and you have to do that first is massive, then you have to go in and physically reconstruct infrastructure that has been dilapidated for decades. And in most cases, just needs to be ripped up and replaced wholesale. 

The one possible exception is Maracaibo, where in theory, in five years you could get output up from its current 200,000 barrels a day to maybe a million. And in theory, the refining complex there, while massively outdated, is still broadly functional and could be rehabilitated without a complete reconstruction. But you are still talking about investment on the front end in tens of thousands of troops, and on the back end in tens of billions of dollars. 

That is not something that I think the American population will support. That is not something I think the Trump administration is interested in. And that’s not something that I think the American super majors are going to get involved in it anyway, considering that there’s so much more crude and other places that are so much easier.

The Beginning of the End of the Shadow Fleet

A photo of an oil tanker set against a red orange sunset

Global oil markets are nearing a massive shock as the shadow fleet edges towards collapse.

With mounting pressure from US seizures, Ukrainian drone attacks, and European interdictions, the roughly 1,000-tanker-strong shadow fleet is in the crosshairs of…everybody. As ships are confiscated, disabled, or destroyed, the numbers stop making sense for captains to run the risk.

This could trigger a severe tanker shortage, driving oil prices up, and making it harder for sanctioned countries to export. We’re not just looking at an immediate price spike; this will be a prolonged oil shock impacting everything from transport to production.

Transcript

Hey all, Peter Zeihan here, coming to you from Colorado. Today we’re taking another look at the shadow fleet and the coming shock that’s coming to the oil markets. For those of you who saw the video last week, you know that we basically have a two track path here. The Shadow Fleet is a group of ships that have been transporting Russian crude most recently, and for over a longer period of time, Venezuelan, Iranian crude. 

The idea is that you hide the ownership behind a series of shell companies and flags of convenience. And evade sanctions. Now you have to sell your crude at a discount when you do this. And the captains and the shipping companies that operate the vessels get risk premiums. But in a world where daily demand for crude is 100 million barrels a day, you can’t really shut out all the major players, no matter what you want to do. 

So the Shadow fleet has formed and now has over 1000 vessels worldwide. Well, as of now, it has six less. So we’ve got three things going on at the same time. First, with the United States, the United States has enacted an embargo of Venezuela and has so far, confiscated three tankers, two of which were part of the shadow fleet and one of which was actually completely above board. 

But the Trump administration doesn’t really care right now. So it’s roughly a million barrels a day from Venezuela that is going to go offline. Number two, the Ukrainians have demonstrated that they’re perfectly capable of taking some of their drones, loading them in the back of pickups or into shipping containers, taking them to a different part of the world completely and launching them. 

So in recent weeks, they have upped their attacks on the shadow fleet, and most recently took out a pair of shadow fleet tankers that were in the Black Sea. But over the weekend, we saw attacks on patrol ships in the Caspian Sea, which is nowhere near Ukraine, and they even almost sank a vessel in Rostov on Don, which is a Russian port, just off the Black Sea, and then disabled a shuttle fleet vessel, off the coast of Libya in international waters. 

So the Ukrainians are showing very clearly that you don’t have to be a superpower to use drones against civilian tankers. 

This is going to cut into the profits of anyone who’s operating the shuttle fleet pretty quickly. Because it’s not clear if any of the insurance companies, which are all Russian state or Chinese state that have insured the companies, are going to pay out on any of the claims, because why would you. It’s functionally illegal. And so if you’re a ship captain, all of a sudden there’s a very real risk that you’re going to lose your vessel. that certainly dissuades people from sailing to certain places. That’s number two. Number three, another Shadow Fleet vessel broke down, just outside of Swedish international waters. And the Swedes went and took it over and discovered Russian military personnel on board. 

So now that the Russians have basically started to treat the shadow fleet like a strategic asset, it will start to be countered as a strategic asset. And we’re basically looking at a not so slow motion collapse of the functionality of the fleet and probably on a global basis. So what happens when you remove a thousand tankers from the fleet? 

Well, all of a sudden you go to a severe tanker shortage, which dries up the price of crude for everyone and countries that are under sanctions, Iran, Venezuela, Russia are going to see a significant reduction in their ability to ship. Couple things to keep in mind on that. One Venezuela. Most of the crude production is something that’s called Orinoco Heavy sour. 

It is very difficult to produce and process and ship. And if you have a slowdown in the flows, it will take them months, if not years, to get it back on line. That’s problem one. Number two. Russia. The, Ukrainians aren’t simply attacking the shadow fleet. They’re going after every part of the energy infrastructure, from pipelines to pumping stations to refineries. 

And if the Russians cannot get crude out of the country, they will have no choice. If they want to save their pipelines, but to shut down production in Siberia. And they have maybe a one, maybe a 1.5 million barrels a day buffer where they can shut down their southern fields where it doesn’t get too cold. But after that, they have to start shutting down the northern fields. 

And if they shut down fields in northern Siberia in the winter, they will freeze shut and they will need to be drilled. That will take years. The last time that functionally happened, it was the end of the Soviet period, and it took the better part of 20 years for the Russians to get all of their wells back on line. 

So we’re not just looking at a shock in the oil markets coming next year. We’re looking at a multi-phase shock that hits transport and production in at least two countries. Runs almost a footnote in this. 

Oh, one more thing. The Russians treating the shadow fleet as a strategic asset. That also means a military asset. Now, the Germans and the Danes are directly accusing the Russian government of using the shadow fleet as it’s transiting through the Baltic Sea to launch drones to overfly critical infrastructure like airports. So, if you may remember, before Thanksgiving, there were a number of reports of drones in Europe that were shutting down airspace, that that was all Russian. 

That was all coming from the shadow fleet. So we now have the Europeans in a position that for military purposes, for economic purposes, they feel they have to shut the fleet down. And since the Ukrainians and the Americans are either confiscating or blowing up the fleet, I’m sure the Europeans will come up with something that is much more appropriate to their toolset. 

So expect a lot of interdiction in European waters in the not too distant future. So really exciting times. And as more stuff blows up, I’ll let you know.

The Beginning of Venezuela’s End

A person walking draped in a Venezuelan flag against a desaturated background

The first domino of regime change in Venezuela has been toppled, as the Trump administration has imposed a naval blockade on the main oil export ports.

No oil exports mean Venezuela’s income vanishes. That means food imports stop. Food shortages will give way to unrest, which will give way to regime collapse. So, what kind of situation will we be looking at once the final domino falls and Maduro relinquishes power?

It’s not going to be pretty. We’re talking about a grim humanitarian outlook, a scary security picture, and an ugly transition of power.

Transcript

Hey, all. Peter Zeihan here coming to you from Colorado. It is the 17th of December. You’ll see this on the 18th in the morning. And we are. Go for regime change in Venezuela. The Trump administration has started a formal blockade of the ports, specifically to prevent the state of Venezuela from generating any foreign currency, which is used to not to support the regime but hold the country together. 

There are three ports. There’s one just off of Caracas, which is the really minor one. There’s two larger ones, to the west, and east of the country. There’s no interconnection of the oil pipelines among the three. So you basically have fields in the markova region that generate somewhere between one fifth and one third of the country’s crude, very easy to block. 

There’s a very narrow network. Basically, you can do that with one ship and you’ve got to Port Jose out on the east side, which is where about two thirds to three quarters of the exports flow. That’s a little bit more difficult. But again, for the US Navy, this is very, very, very minor. Not hard to do at all. 

And so Venezuela is now going to go from a country that exports about a million barrels a day of crude to one that exports none. And this is something like 90% of the hard currency earnings of the country. And that money is what is used to maintain the regime and to purchase the roughly 80% of the country’s food that is imported. 

So within a matter of days, we’re going to be having food riots because they really don’t have much stored up. And then without the currency, you we’re probably going to see the regime start to crack. A couple things to keep in mind. First, locally in Venezuela and then the broader world. Number one, this is a country that is armed to the teeth. 

That doesn’t mean that I think that it helps the government. But back under Chavez, over a million ak47s were handed up to the population. And so any force that goes in or any force that’s local that tries to assert authority, regardless of their political backdrop, is going to have a horrific time. And we’re not so much looking at a civil war or a civil breakdown, in a country with over million people. 

So the outcomes for Venezuela are beyond dire, and we should expect a general breakdown of civilization here over the course of the next several months, unless the Trump administration changes its mind really aggressively. You’re not going to have a foreign force that can put this right. You’re not going to have a local force that can maintain authority. 

There just too many weapons in too many hands for that to be one of the reasonable options. Which brings us to the second thing, that the oil that comes out of Venezuela is going to go away for at least several years. Right now that’s only a million barrels a day. But something the Trump administration has shown is that we can now have a sovereign state going specifically after oil tankers of the shadow fleets. 

And a lot of these tankers don’t just service Venezuela, they also service Iran and Russia as well. And we have now broken the Seal and other countries, or maybe the United States as well, is probably going to start going after those other shadow tankers as well. A 1 million barrels per day disruption out of Venezuela for a market that is at the moment probably oversupplied is not a big deal. 

But then you add another million from Iran and perhaps as many as 4 or 5 million from Russia. And you’re talking about a very different world. So we are at the start of a very significant international shock in energy. And calendar year 2026 is going to be a wild ride.

What’s the Deal in Canada?

Canadian flag flying over Parliament

While we Americans were carving up our turkeys last week, the Canadians had a political breakthrough. The Prime Minister and the Alberta Premier made a compromise to advance a new pipeline route for Alberta’s heavy crude.

This pipeline would extend through northern British Columbia, requiring the repeal of federal bans on pipelines and tanker loadings in the region. In return, Alberta will adopt a national carbon-pricing framework. This marks a dramatic shift following Trudeau’s 15 years of hostile relations.

Carney’s restoration of a political middle seems more feasible following this compromise. While there is still plenty of uncertainty about what this next chapter looks like, I’m cautiously optimistic.

Transcript

Hey everybody. Peter Zeihan here coming to you from a chilly Colorado. It’s only about ten degrees right now, which is like -12 Celsius y Celsius. Well, we’re going to talk about Canada today, specifically on America’s Thanksgiving Day. We had a breakthrough political agreement between the prime minister of Canada, a guy by the name Carney, and the premier, which is kind of like a governor of Alberta, Miss Smith, very, very short version. 

It was a civil conversation that ended in a compromise that will probably benefit almost all parties. It’s like wild, exclusively dealt with energy. Basically, the Canadian government at the federal level has agreed to now push a Bitterman pipeline. That’s that heavy, thick crude that Alberta produces by basically electrifying the ground crazy technology. Anyway, it comes up thick. 

It comes up dirty, requires a lot of specialized processing and handling. And so Alberta has always sold its crude into the American market, because the United States is the only that really process it at scale. But it’s always sold it into a big discount, because it’s a captive market and the United States is an oil exporter itself. 

Now, the federal government has committed to a pipeline across British Columbia, to the northern part of the province. Right now, there’s a federal ban on oil pipelines and tanker loadings, in northern BC. So that will have to change in exchange, Alberta has agreed to a carbon pricing regime with the goal of getting Canada as a whole down to zero emissions by 2050. 

Now we can discuss the pros and cons of that at a later time. But the bottom line is that Alberta has always vociferously avoided any sort of carbon pricing or emissions trading because it is an oil economy, whereas, Canada tends to be relatively green. And even though Alberta is a single largest source of income for the federal government, the fact that it’s all based on the back of oil, has never really gone over well in Ottawa or many other other provincial capitals. 

Now, there are many, many, many, many, many details that remain to be worked out. But a couple things to keep in mind. Number one, we have had the federal government and the Alberta and provincial government screaming at one another. For the best part of the past 15 years. The reason is the no longer in power government of Justin Trudeau was basically had a collective IQ wattage of about four, and couldn’t even pretend to have an adult conversation about any of the topics at hand. 

Does not mean for a second that the Albertans were flexible. But if the federal government really wasn’t willing to entertain discussing real issues with Alberta, of course nothing was going to happen. Now it seems that that is changing. Which brings us to number two. The political middle in Canada has been this vacant parking lot for over a decade. 

The Trudeau government could only rule, even as a minority government, by catering to lots and lots and lots of special interests, of which Greens were one. And that made it very difficult to get anything done at the national level. Even before you consider the Alberta question, Carney, campaigned on returning to the political middle. And if he can lead Canada’s Liberals, which are not a great comparison of the kind of like America’s Democrats, if he can lead Canada’s Liberal Party into the political middle, he’ll dominate a lot of things for a long time. 

But third, like I said, lots of fine print, lots of things that remain to be done at the moment. Canada’s First Nations are not part of this deal. They have facto veto power over many decisions. Number two, British Columbia, which is the province that the pipeline has to go through, is not part of this deal. 

And in the past, they’ve screamed bloody murder to basically scrap anything that Alberta has ever wanted to do. Basically, think of this as the clash between Texas and California just in Canadian politics. And then third, Canada has yet to set up that pricing regime. And until we know what the number is, one of the other components of this deal, which is a carbon capture program, we don’t know how that’s going to work. 

Carbon capture is the idea is that as a side effect of an industrial process, you produce carbon dioxide, and then you inject it into the ground rather than letting it go into the atmosphere. From a cost benefit point of view, it’s a really bad idea. From an environmental point of view, it’s probably a broadly good idea because it gets the carbon work, can’t get in the atmosphere, but it’s not free. 

And until they figure out how much carbon credits cost, no one knows how much you will benefit from this sort of market by putting the stuff in the ground. So lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of details to get into. But the fact that, Carney and Smith were all smiles and had such a broad arrangement of compromises and agreements, we have not seen this in Canadian politics for really the better part of a generation now. 

I’m hopeful, but they’ve got a lot of work ahead of them.

Can Anyone Replicate the US Shale Revolution?

An oil rig on the sunset

The US shale revolution has altered the trajectory of the US energy sector, but can that success story be replicated anywhere else? Let’s head down under and examine Australia’s shale potential.

The Aussies have some promising geology, but lack practically every other metric that contributed to the success of the US shale revolution: abundant water, proximity to cities and infrastructure, deep labor pool, fast-moving regulators, and favorable mineral rights for landowners. That last one is the big one, because without that monetary incentive for landowners…what’s motivating anyone?

There are some other countries that have a better shot at replicating the US shale boom. Argentina already holds the second-largest shale industry. Mexico and Canada have the shale resources, but their industries are so tied to American infrastructure and markets that the US would have to help.

Transcript

Hey everybody, Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from Colorado. Today we’re taking a question from our Patreon page, specifically from one of our friends down in Australia, wondering if it would be possible for Australia to recreate the sort of energy complex that the United States has, courtesy of the shale revolution. The United States is now just a gross over producer of both oil and natural gas. 

It’s driven down energy costs in the country, especially electricity costs, which are now among the lowest in the world. And it’s generated a robust processing and manufacturing system with downstream work and a significant export industry, Australia having a smaller population, but almost as much land could they do it? I don’t want to say no, but there’s some things you have to keep in mind. 

Number one, geology is just the first step. So in order to have a shale industry, you have to have a lot of sedimentary layers that are petroleum bearing that just the right age to generate oil, natural gas. And the United States has that because in the past, the North American continent, especially our part of it, has had a series of shallow seas. 

And then geology would change, and then you’d get another shallow sea and you basically got these stacked layers so you can drill down and hit multiple petroleum producing zones. In fact, in some places in West Texas, you can have upwards of 20 layers that you can all access from one vertical. Now with shale technology, you go down it until you hit that layer and then you go horizontally. 

And that brings us to the second thing. You need water. The way shale works is you make this suspension of water and sand, and that is pumped into the lateral through a series of holes that basically crack the, rock open and release the petroleum. And then back pressure pushes all the liquid out and eventually oil and natural gas comes to the surface. 

Don’t have to pump the stuff, but you have to have the water to do it. And part of that folds into the third issue, which is proximity. You have to have relative proximity for your oil and natural gas production. Two population centers are places that can take the stuff for processing. And in this this the United States is pretty good. 

We have shale zones in Texas, which of course can get pumped to corpus Christi in Houston. And the rest we’ve got some in Colorado which benefit the Denver area. We’ve got some in Ohio which can be pumped into the Northeast and Pennsylvania. Same thing. Australia’s problem is that most of the geology that looks promising is in the outback. 

So not only is it a long ways away from any potential population centers, you’re in the middle of a literal desert, so the water access is more difficult. You can access groundwater that’s done in the United States, too. But all of these things incrementally raise the cost of development. Let’s see what else. Regulatory structure. This is one where a lot of countries, trip up shale wells, as a rule, generate somewhere from the hundreds of barrels to thousands of barrels a day, which sounds great, but it’s not like the mega wells you’re going to get a place like, say, Saudi Arabia. 

So you’re going to have more of them and they’re more involved from a technical point of view for production. So you have to have a more advanced educational system to generate that sort of workforce. And the United States really does stand out among the world when it comes to petroleum engineers, because we’ve been doing it for so long. 

The shale revolution at this point is about 20 years old. In the United States. Our first oil deposits were back in the mid 1800s. So this is something that we’ve been going and going and going. It’s not that the Australians don’t have that, but most of what the Australians have been doing for energy production in the last 30 years has been offshore, where they tap foreign labor almost as much as local labor. 

So there’s there’s a labor crunch there. In addition, if you live in Houston, you can work in West Texas. If you live in Sydney or Brisbane, you’re probably not going to be working on the northwest shelf. It’s just too far. So linking these together, and then on the regulatory side, you have to be able to do things on the fly very, very quickly and have a regulatory structure. 

That’s okay with that. So in Texas, the Texas Railroad Commission, which is the one that regulates the space issues, permits 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. They drill on Sundays, they drill on Christmas. And if you don’t have an institution set up to handle that, everything else gets pushed back. This is one of the reasons why the shale attempt in Poland just didn’t work out, because the poles tried to work European hours and it just didn’t fly. 

The geology wasn’t as good either. But the most important thing, the single most important thing is landowners have to have an interest in the industry. So in the United States, unless you have signed it away, you own the mineral rights on your land. So if a petroleum company comes and wants to drill in your land, you get a chunk of the proceeds. 

We’re the only country in the world that does it that way. So when the United Kingdom tried to kick in the shale that ten years ago, they discovered huge amounts of local opposition because the companies would take all of the money, and that would be that the locals had to deal with the noise and the traffic and all the rest, and they saw absolutely no benefit. 

Australia is kind of in that camp. So if, if, if this is going to happen, it’s going to take a lot more money and put a lot of pressure on the labor force and require a regulatory and maybe even a legal overhaul of property rights in Australia in order to generate the sort of outcome that you might want to see. 

There are three countries, however, that are worth keeping an eye on when it comes to shale that are closer than Australia to achieving something like the United States. The first, ironically, is Argentina. They already have preexisting infrastructure in a place called vacuum worth a dead cow fields which are very close to populated Argentina, including Buenos Aires. The socialist governments of the past set a price floor. 

So anyone going to invest knows how much they’re going to get out. So even though the property law structures are weird and it’s Argentina. So if they’re very weird, if you know the rules of the game on the day that you start, you can get some projects going. And so Argentina already has the second most successful shale industry in the world. 

The other two to watch are Mexico and Canada. both have a shale fields that in many ways are extensions of the American geography, especially northern Mexico. The weird thing about Canada in Mexico, though, is their closest population centers for most considerations around the American side of the border. So if we’re going to ever see a successful shale industry in those two countries, it will be because they’re accessing American infrastructure, population structure, processing infrastructure and basically linking into a greater North American energy grid. 

Doesn’t mean it can’t happen, but if you’re in Ottawa or Mexico City developing a local energy sector to serve another country, let’s just call that a bit of a political complication.

The Pressure Is Dialing Up on Russia’s Oil Network

A russian oil refinery

I’ve been discussing the potential for Russian crude supply shortages and a broader collapse of the Russian oil system since the Ukraine War started…so, is it finally happening?

Ukraine’s recent attacks on Russian energy infrastructure have brought a potential oil crisis within arm’s reach. The Ukrainians are getting smarter, striking critical nexus points and ports; refining capacity is dropping, crude is backing up, and storage capacity is running out. These bottlenecks create pressure in the pipelines and wells, and you can imagine what happens next. Should this extend into the winter, frozen wells could add onto the crisis.

Since much of the energy infrastructure in Russia relies upon Western-tech and labor, that leaves them with few options at resolving these issues in a timely manner (if at all). And then you factor in Ukraine’s strikes on the shadow fleet and things begin to get really spicy.

Transcript

Hey, all Peter Zeihan here come to you from Colorado. And today we’re going to talk about the net effect of all of these recent waves of attacks by drones and by the Ukrainians on energy infrastructure in Russia. Now, this is following up to a video I did a couple of weeks ago talking about how we were starting to see some really very real damage in the energy complex of Russia, with somewhere between 15 and 20% of the refining capacity going offline. 

Since then, the Ukrainians have massively upped their target set, going in and hitting things that are further away. Now, some of these attacks are more political and mine the ones that places like Moscow, where the political elite lives, or Sochi down in the Black Sea, where the political elite vacations. But the far more important attacks, from the two general categories. 

The first one is the Ukrainians are showing that they can hit targets more than a thousand miles away from their borders. Specifically a place called Bashkortostan. It’s a province in western Siberia, eastern European Russia, populated by ethnic Bashkuri, who are, a Turkic minority. Pretty large one in the Russian space. 

But the fun thing about Bashkortostan is it sits at a pipeline nexus that links pretty much all of the southern Siberian energy fields into the European pipeline network. And so if there’s meaningful damage in Bashkortostan and you’re not just looking at problems with refining their production, you’re talking about upwards of 3 million barrels a day that could get locked in. 

And the Ukrainians have figured out that going after a pumping station is a really good idea if you want to disable some of the pumping infrastructure. That’s part one. Part two. Primorsk. Primorsk is a port on the Gulf of Finland, very close to Saint Petersburg. Gulf of Finland an arm of the Baltic Sea. 

It is arguably, Russia’s top export destination. That the Gulf of Finland writ large. Not only is there Primorsk, there’s a place called Ust-Luga. Both of them have been hit recently, and both of them now are operating below half effectiveness. So Primorsk used to export about a million barrels a day. Now it’s about half that Ust-Luga. 

It used to be about 700,000 barrels a day. Now it’s about half that. You put all this together, and the Russians are facing a crisis point in their energy sector that honestly, I’m a little surprised it hasn’t happened to this point. You see, the Russian energy sector has limited export points that are not well linked together. They’ve got a single spot out on the Far East that kind of has its own network and then out on the western side, they’ve got a few ports on the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea, and the rest are piped exports that go through Ukraine or Belarus into Europe proper. 

Those pipelines have now been shut down. That just leaves the maritime ports. And if something happens, that would prevent crude from, say, reaching for some might be able to go to the Black Sea, but none of it could go out to the Far East. So the Russians are losing flexibility within their system. And now that we’ve got roughly three quarters of a million barrels per day of throughput on the Baltic Sea that can’t flow, and now that we have 20% of refining off line, all of a sudden there’s somewhere in the vicinity of about 2 million barrels a day of crude produced that can’t go anywhere. 

Unlike the American system, where there’s massive tank farms in every major city, the Russians don’t have that. They’re used to producing crude, sending it to refineries, having it turned into fuel and consumed locally or exported. And the rest goes to an export point and is exported. If you have friction in that system where the fuel can’t be produced, then the crude has to go somewhere else. 

It has to go to a port, and if the ports can’t take it, pressure builds up back in the pipeline system all the way back to the wellhead, which means if something doesn’t change in just the next 2 or 3 weeks, there’s going to be so much pressure in the system that either we’re going to have a rupture in the pipeline, which would be really, really bad for any number of reasons, or the Russians are going to have to shut down their production sites back at the wellhead and lock in a million barrels a day or more. 

The problem is, it’s already late September. Winter is almost upon us. And if these pipes are shut down, or if those wells are shut in in the winter, the crude will freeze in the wellhead. And if they want to turn it back on, they can’t just flip a switch. They have to re drill the well. And a lot of these wells are either old or were produced with Western technology, which means it has to be done from scratch with what the Russians can do with themselves or import from the Chinese, which isn’t sufficient for the technology required in order to make it all work. 

So we could be three years into this war, finally on the verge of a crude shortage, because the Russians just can’t play. Well, no. Real soon, repairing things like refineries takes time. Especially if you’re talking about this distillation columns that the Ukrainians have been hitting, the pressure testing that is required to make sure the thing doesn’t explode is something the Russians and the Chinese cannot do themselves. 

They import all of that from the West. It’s going to be a problem getting the parts. And in the case of Primorsk, not only did the Ukrainians hit a pumping station, they also had a couple of ghost fleet tankers. So all of a sudden, whatever insurance the Russian government or the Indian government or the Chinese government has been providing to these ships all of a sudden has to be paid out. 

And that hasn’t happened yet. And so, lo and behold, tankers aren’t going to risk in the volume that they need to be going if the pipeline system is going to stay online. We’ve been waiting for all of these things to happen, either one or the other, for three years, and all of a sudden they’re all happening at the same time. 

It’s kind of exciting.

Ukraine Hammers Russian Oil Infrastructure

photo of oil barrels

The Ukrainians have ramped up strikes on Russian energy infrastructure, sending ripples through Russia’s refining capacity and triggering fuel shortages. But what changes enabled this to occur?

Three big things have shifted, giving Ukraine political cover and better tools to disrupt Russian oil flows. These include opposition from the US diminishing, Europe cutting off Russian oil and gas (besides Hungary and Slovakia), and longer-range weapons to strike deeper into Russia.

This is allowing Kyiv to strike Russia’s most critical oil hubs; think the pipeline nexus Samara, or pumping stations that will force Novorossiysk to collapse, or even northern hubs serving the Baltic. Since oil remains the largest revenue source for the Russians, sustained attacks on this infrastructure threatens Moscow’s ability to fight this war.

Transcript

Hey all Peter Zeihan here coming from Colorado on a foggy day. Today we’re gonna talk about what’s going on in Russia, specifically. Ukraine has severely ramped up its attacks on Russian energy infrastructure. This is something that the Ukrainians have been doing in bits and pieces for about a year and a half now, but it’s now taken on a whole new level, and we have somewhere between 15 and 20% of Russia’s oil processing capacity offline. 

And it’s generating localized gasoline shortages throughout the Russian system, including in the capital, and certainly in the provinces that are closer to the actual front in the Ukraine war. So what has changed? Three things. First of all, Biden’s gone. Biden had this idea that attacks on energy infrastructure in, the Russian space would raise energy prices globally to a point that would be politically unpalatable for Americans. 

Now, I was always on the other side of that equation, as a rule, gasoline markets, not to be confused with oil markets, trade differently. And so a disruption in one hemisphere does not automatically trigger a broad scale energy price increase in the other. But regardless, Biden has now gone. That argument is no longer being made in Washington. 

And from Ukraine’s point of view, the gloves are off a little bit. Number two Europe, the Europeans are no longer taking any piped oil or natural gas from the Russians at all, aside from a small volumes that come into places like Hungary, which are basically operating as Russian parties. Which means that from Ukraine’s point of view, there’s no longer diplomatic or economic complication in Europe. 

The deals to transit oil and natural gas across Ukrainian space expired at the beginning of the year. Everyone who was smart and saw the writing on the wall, moved away from the Russian sources completely again, Hungary being the standout exception. And now going after the infrastructure in any way, shape or form basically has the unofficial blessing of the European Union. 

So the Hungarians and to the lesser degree the Slovaks, are screaming bloody murder. But Ukraine isn’t giving transit fees. They’re not taking any Russian energy. No one else in the EU is taking any of it either. So it’s okay to go after the infrastructure. We’ve actually seen a couple pumping stations get hit already. Third, the Ukrainians are much better at this. 

They’ve been developing bit by bit heavier payloads and longer range weaponry that can strike further and further and harder and harder at Russian targets. And so now reliably, it’s to a range of about 1200 kilometers. The Ukrainians can be striking, and that’s about 700 miles. And that puts a lot in range of these potential weapons, including the entire Moscow region. 

But Moscow is not the most important zone here when you’re talking about oil. There are a few pipeline hubs in the Russian system where several pipeline networks from different zones come together for focusing and refining, and then go on to export points. And in my opinion, the single most important of them is the city of Samara in southwestern Russia. 

It’s basically roughly north of the Caspian Sea, maybe northwest a little bit. Anyway, something around 3 million barrels a day flows through there at any given time. Pipelines, of course, can be redirected to a degree. But we now have the Ukrainians targeting refineries in the Samara area. And when they do that, the crude can’t be refined. It needs to be kept in the pipeline and sent on, and the pipelines flow on can only take so much traffic. 

So it’s put a real crimp in what the Russians can produce. And we’re already starting to see some reports, a few reports of shut in production because the pipelines can’t handle the flows to the volumes that are necessary because the refineries are offline. If and when the Ukrainians decide to go after the pumping stations on the pipelines themselves, then this whole part of the network breaks, and that will probably be the end of meaningful exports from Russian crude to the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. 

And as the Ukrainians continue to get better and better weapons, some of the distribution systems of the hubs in northern Russia will probably start getting hit as well. And that could really impinge upon the Baltic Pipeline system, which is where the Russians export crude from the Baltic Sea, from, near Saint Petersburg. The specific port escapes me at the moment. 

Anyway, so with the politics changed and the economic dependencies shifted, and the Ukrainians all of a sudden a lot better at what they were doing, we should expect a lot more Russian crude going offline. So regardless of what happens with the Trump administration and sanctions and its effort to peel, say, the Indians and or the Chinese away from the Russians, if the crude can’t flow, the crude can’t flow, and the Russian economic situation with then become a lot more difficult because oil sales remain what they have always been for Moscow, their single biggest source of income, going all the way back to Soviet times.

The Highs and Lows of Burgum’s Energy Strategy

Photo of a pumping station at sunset

Trump’s Secretary of the Interior, Doug Burgum, has shifted his energy strategy to focus on oil and gas. He’s doing this because renewables are no longer financially viable in most of the US, but there are some holes in his plan.

Between interest rates and tariffs, solar and wind projects are making less and less sense in fewer and fewer places. So, a fossil fuels-based strategy makes sense; however, using federal lands isn’t going to be the magic solution Burgum makes it out to be.

Given the lack of infrastructure, slow permitting cycles, and limited financial incentives…development will be slow and pricey. We’re talking a decade+ before anything meaningful comes out of it. Burgum’s geopolitical angle is what really interests me, though. He hopes to use US oil to undercut Russia, which doesn’t quite align with the rest of Trump’s inner circle.

Transcript

Hey all Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from Colorado. Today we’re taking a question from the Patreon page, specifically about Doug Burgum, who is the new Secretary of the interior under the second Trump administration. And the question is basically, Burgum seems to have devolved from an all of the above approach to energy to just fossil fuels, just oil and gas. Why is that? And should we care? I think that’s broadly an accurate assessment, but he’s not doing it for ideological reasons, despite the fact that he’s in the Trump administration’s, Burgum basically is saying that oil and gas is more reliable for the environment that we’re in right now, and we need to unlock the federal lands to get as much of it out as possible. 

So let me talk about why he’s probably right and then why he’s probably wrong. So first the correct. We’ve seen the cost of financing go up by a factor of roughly five, in the last six years. And that means if you are looking to borrow capital, everything just costs more. So, for example, take mortgage. I’ve owned my house since before the transition, so my mortgage rate is 2.5%. 

You know, eat your heart out, Millennials. Today the mortgage rate are above seven, and they’re probably only going to be rising for the remainder of the decade and well into the next one. 

So let’s say just to pick numbers that your mortgage today is 8% compared to my 2.5%. That means your monthly payment on a 30 year mortgage is a little over twice what I pay. 

So whatever the house is you are looking at, suddenly you’re looking at having to pay twice as much and that entire increase is all extra interest. Well, most green tech projects, whether it’s solar or wind or biomass or whatever else, don’t have very high fuel costs. Everything is the upfront, construction, the land siting, the physical construction, the labor for that. 

And that tends to be roughly two thirds of the cost of the entire project. If you compare that to a conventional natural gas or coal system, a thermal system, most of the cost, roughly two thirds is fuel, and only about one fifth of the cost is that upfront construction. Well, the upfront construction is something you have to finance. 

So you’re talking about a project that already had a much higher financing, burden. And now you’re roughly doubling, if not more, the cost of the project over its life. Now, I have solar panels on my roof. They paid for themselves in four years. But part of that is because of where I live. I live at 7500ft. And that means I live above an elevation where 99.5% of other Americans live. 

So there’s very little air, much less moisture, much less cloud between me and the sun. In addition, ambient humidity in my neck of the woods is about 15% versus the national average of over 60. About 90% of Americans live in a place that’s more humid, so I’m closer to the sun. I have less obstacles, the humidity doesn’t get in the way, and so I was able to pay for my panels in four years because the amount of electricity we generate, you drop down to where I lived in Austin, where the humidity is much higher and I was only at about 1000ft. 

And the break even for those panels took closer to I think it was nine years. If you moved to say, New York out of the city, you’re talking about much higher humidity, much lower solar penetration, much lower altitude and your break even time if you’re lucky, is going to be in the 11 to 14 year range. 

That was when interest rates were cheap. Now you need to double that, maybe even triple that. So there really aren’t a lot of places in the country that have a decent economic payback for wind and solar in the current environment. I live in one of them, but like I said, 99.5% of Americans live below me and 90% of Americans live in a place with lower humidity. 

So I am not the norm here. Still works here, still works in Colorado, still works in North Dakota. Burgum should know North Dakota isn’t just a leading oil and gas state. It’s a leading wind state. But you change the rules of finance like we have and that doesn’t help very much. And so most projects in most of the country just aren’t economically viable in today’s capital cost environment. 

And that’s before you consider that the vast, vast, vast majority of the solar panels we use in the United States are imported from China. And so now there’s a tariff, tacked on top of that, that at the moment is 55%. But by the time we see this, I’m sure that number is going to change. Oh, okay. So that’s where it becomes probably right. 

Solar and wind, at least for now, are offline unless there’s a significant change in the environment, whether because of the technology, the manufacturing base or the cost of financing, it’s really not going to be a big part of the picture in the United States for the rest of the decade, and probably throughout the next one where he’s wrong. 

Federal lands. Okay, federal lands by almost default, have very little infrastructure on them. You’re talking natural forests are, for the most part, in addition, because they’re federal lands, they have not been exploited for economic purposes aside from logging here and there. And there’s very, very, very little oil and gas development on them at all except in the offshore, which is a special case, maybe a topic for another time. 

One of the things that we’ve learned about the shale revolution is that the states control most subsoil rights. They can be privately held, but the states control the regulation on federal lands. The subsoil rights are all federally held. They are not controlled by private interest. So step one, there is no one who would get involved in the project who has a personal financial reason to push it. 

If you want to go on to federal land, you have to get a lease that costs money. So already you’ve got that layer of cost built in that does not exist in, say, the Permian in West Texas or the Bakken in North Dakota. Problem number two is infrastructure. One of the reasons that the Permian in the Bakken had been such successful oil plays in the shale revolution is because a lot of the infrastructure was already there from previous oil booms, and for the first roughly decade, they were just putting new oil into old pipes. 

It’s only in the last decade that they’ve actually had to build more physical infrastructure. For takeaway capacity. You want to produce oil or gas in federal lands. You have to build that infrastructure from scratch. And most of these places not only don’t have pipes, they don’t have roads. Third problem information, because the Permian in the back end were preexisting fields, there had been preexisting geological surveys of them. 

There was some place for the shale guys to start. You want to do this in federal lands, you have to start from scratch. Fourth regulation Texas, North Dakota A handful of other states have a relatively encouraging investment climate for oil and gas because they have decades of experience. The federal government doesn’t have that on most federal lands, and so they’re gonna have to make it up as they go. 

Now, could this Trump plan for massive deregulation make a difference? Sure. But consider the scale on the time in Texas. If you want to drill from the point you submit your permit, 99% of permits are approved or denied one way or the other within 48 hours. In the United States, on federal lands, it generally takes 230 days. Now, when Trump won, they got that down to 220 days. 

But the bonfire of regulation that would required would first require the Trump administration staffing up the senior staff of the various departments in order to figure out which regulations to keep and lose. And that process has not yet begun, and we are already in July at five. Oh my God, it’s only been five months. Holy crap. Anyway, if all of these pieces were to magically fall into place today, you build your roads, you start your seismic surveys, you start building the pipeline infrastructure with money you have not yet earned. 

Then you start drilling. You would expect to see first meaningful output of oil and gas from the federal lands. Assuming that the surveys show that there was oil and gas there. Let’s call it 2040. Texas wasn’t made in a day. It took a century to build Texas’s oil platforms and what it is now, you’re not going to wave a magic wand to make it all happen overnight. 

So wind and solar, most places. Yeah, that’s for the past. That’s for the far future. When? When gas on federal lands. I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one, but I don’t think we really need it. The United States already produces more oil and gas in any country in history. In fact, we export an extra 5 million barrels per day of refined product. 

We export more finished product, gasoline, jet fuel, and the rest than any three countries in world history have ever produced. Raw crude. That’s already the best in human history. I really don’t overly feel the need that we need to do more, unless you want to do it for geopolitical reasons. And this is where Bergmann gets kind of interesting from my point of view. 

He has emerged as a voice in the foreign policy establishment on the topic of energy dominance. Now, that is for the most part, just a bunch of bunk that Trump likes to say from time to time that has never actually been put into any meaningful policy. But Bergen’s idea is to deliberately drive specific oil producers and exporters out of the market, and then displace them with American crude. 

And the country that he is most interested in doing that, too, is Russia. He wants to crack down on the Russian shadow fleet, which is using under or uninsured old leaky tankers to send roughly 3 million barrels of crude a day around the world. He wants to break any pipeline connections. The Russians have to the outside world, and then he wants to steadily ratchet up sanctions so that they can’t keep the existing oil fields that they had going. 

That’s really interesting. That could take us a lot of fun places. And since in an American shale context, it only takes 6 to 12 weeks to bring in a new oil well online, it could be done with a relatively limited impact on international markets, all else being equal, which of course, they never are. But it has put him at a crossroads with most of the people that Trump listens to on foreign policy. 

Basically right now, the inner circle doesn’t include the secretary of state, Rubio, who’s basically been banished after Foggy Bottom and isn’t allowed into the meetings. You’ve got some of Trump’s buddies from New York real estate. And we’ve basically been wrapped around the little finger of Vladimir Putin. 

You’ve got the director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who, if she’s not working for Putin, is probably a clone of him. And now we have Laura Loomer, who has basically taken over as de facto national security advisor. Laura Loomer is basically a, a far less competent version of Hillary Clinton. So she’s mean. She wants to kill people, but she doesn’t actually know anything about what she’s talking about. So, you know, you put that together and all of a sudden you’ve got this former governor of North Carolina who walks in like numbers and facts and history and economics matter. It’s an interesting room.

Oil Markets Aren’t Worried About Iran

Photo of gas pumps at a station

With everything going on between Israel and Iran right now, I know what you’re thinking – it’s time to run to Costco and fill up the gas tank. Hear me out though, we don’t live in the same world we did a few decades ago.

Oil markets aren’t reacting to this conflict for a few reasons, but it boils down to where the crude is coming from. Between the US shale revolution and a diminishing importance of the Persian Gulf in oil markets, this conflict just doesn’t move the needle like it used to.

Sure, there could be a situation where I might start to worry. But that would require Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz (very unlikely) OR marching troops all the way to Saudi Arabia’s oil fields (also very unlikely). So, unless some dramatic military step is taken by Iran, we can all just fill up whenever it’s convenient.

Transcript

Hey, all Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from a somewhat breezy and drizzly Colorado. Today we’re going to talk about the attack that happened over the weekend in Iran. Israel’s basically bombing the crap out of Iran, going after the nuclear facilities. And, contrary to popular concern, oil prices really haven’t done all that much. They’ve moved less than 10%. 

Why do they not care? Why do I not care? Now, if you back up 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 years ago, any sort of spat involving Israel in any way immediately sent oil prices through the roof. And if it involved Iran, oh boy howdy. Because the Persian Gulf remains, even today, the world’s largest producer of crude and by far the world’s largest exporter of the stuff. 

And with in the modern day, the Europeans no longer taking crude from, Russia because of the Ukraine war, it’s become more important to global petroleum than it’s ever been before. However, however, however, there is another factor and that is the US shale revolution. The United States, in the last 20 years has gone from the world’s largest importer crude to, in gross terms, the second largest exporter, second only to Saudi Arabia. Does that mean we’re completely immune to what’s going on? But it does mean that we’re dumping more than 10 million barrels a day of crude into this market than what we did before, closer to 15, actually, now that I think about it. 

And that changes the math for everything, because if we did have a sharp cut off of the very thing in the Persian Gulf, the United States would face some teething pains as we use some of the crude grades that we produce in refineries that weren’t designed for it. But overall, we’d be okay. And having that extra 10 or 15 million barrels a day of global production just means that in percentage terms, the Middle East doesn’t matter nearly as much as it used to. 

Now, where does that take us? More specifically, what would make us worry? I am of the opinion now that even if Iran decided it wanted to shut down the shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf, it probably couldn’t. They’ve got a lot of small boats. A lot of them are really nothing more than, speedboats. It could do some damage. 

But about the only thing that is going to get Iran any assistance, any sympathy in the international system is if it doesn’t shut down the energy line that allows countries like China to function. If it does, that really is all on its own, except for the Russians, who would be happy to see global energy go up in smoke, which means, it’s down to how good their military is. 

And, you know, Iran has never, ever, ever in its history been a naval power. Probably the last battle that Iran was really noteworthy. It was like against Sparta. And if you’ve seen, you know, those movies, you know exactly what I’m talking about. It didn’t end well. What would make me care? Well, if Iran were to take its military and surge it into Iraq and south through Kuwait and go for the Saudi oil fields with the intention of taking them offline. 

That would get my attention. Iraq plus Kuwait. You’re talking 5 to 6 million barrels a day. Once you talk about the Saudi oil fields, you’re talking about another ten. All of these Saudi oil fields are in the far east of the country, really close to gutter. In a Shia majority area, and in theory with the Iranians, who are also Shia religiously, would get along with these people. 

So you could see some sort of rebellion happening at the same time. But for that to happen, that would be a big risk for Iran these days. One of the things we’ve seen with the Israeli attack is Iran no longer has any meaningful air defense whatsoever, and it’s generally easier to have static air defense in it. It has mobile air defense. 

So if they take their army and throw it at Saudi Arabia, they would have no air cover at all. In addition, Iran does not have what we would consider to be a mechanized military. It’s an infantry heavy force. So you’d basically be sending, don’t know, 50,000 hundred thousand, 200,000 men marching through the desert, 500 miles. Leaving aside the logistical terrain, that would be easy pickings. 

They would be completely open to the sky the entire way. And so even a successful operation would be hugely costly for them. And a failed operation would mean the end of the Iranian government, because the Iranian military wasn’t designed to fight other countries. It was designed to occupy all of the non Iranian non Persians in the country of Iran. 

Only about half the population are ethnically Persian. So if if they were to do that, it would be incredibly risky. And unless they pull it off successfully, I still don’t care and neither should you.

What’s Up with the Middle East: Saudi Oil Slips

Photo of black oil barells

Oil has been the secret sauce for the Middle East for ages, but that’s beginning to change.

The Chinese are now the top importer and consumer of oil, driven by all that energy-intensive industrialization. US oil consumption is dropping, although exports of refined products have masked this a bit. The US shale boom has also made American energy independent and competitive, which isn’t great for Saudi manipulation and control of oil markets.

Which means Saudi Arabia is losing some of its influence; the US doesn’t need the crude, Saudi Arabia’s costs are rising, and more competitors continue to pump oil regardless of market signals. But the Saudis aren’t completely out of options…they could always just use a little terrorism to destabilize their rivals.

Transcript

Hey, all, Peter Zeihan here coming to you from Zion National Park. This is Zion Canyon. That is the infamous Angel’s Landing, which I will not be doing a video from. But we continue our coverage in the Middle East today talking about what makes the whole region matter. And of course, that is oil. We’ve got a lot of crosscurrents going on, and international oil markets right now. 

We’ll start with demand. Then we’ll go to supply. Demand is weird. The United States has largely completed its transition to a services economy. And so we’re becoming more and more efficient for every dollar of GDP that we make. And so in terms of actual oil demand, we’ve actually seen demand drop in the United States. I’d argue for the last 15 years. 

Now, you’re not going to see that in the data, because the United States has massively increased its production and export of refined products. So technically, we’re still absorbing crude turned into things like jet film gasoline and then sending it out for a profit. But in terms of our normal consumption, it’s actually gone down by quite a bit. 

The second big factor, of course, is China, which is pricing sensitive and factor insensitive. They basically expand their money supply in order to give everybody a job. Most of those jobs end up being in the industrial space, which is relatively energy intensive. And so they need every drop of the stuff they can get from everywhere. So China has overtaken the United States as the world’s largest oil importer by far. 

And if you look at the numbers the way I do, they’re clearly the world’s largest oil consumer as well. But unlike, the Chinese, the United States has an ace in the hole, and that’s the shale revolution. So now we talk about supply. The United States has gone from producing less than 5 million barrels a day as recently as 20 years ago to, now, something closer to 15 million barrels a day. 

Most of that increase has been in the shale fields, where it’s relatively light, relatively sweet, fairly easy to refine, but not necessarily geared towards the American preferences when it comes to refinery infrastructure. So we end up exporting a lot of that stuff as well, and then bringing in some heavier, more sour stuff from Canada in particular. From the Saudi point of view. 

All of the math is out of whack. The Saudis are completely incapable of defending themselves in a real war. And their plan has always been to lean on the United States for security support. And they do that by making sure that the United States always has as much oil as it possibly wants. But now the U.S. really doesn’t care on a systemic basis about oil markets at all, because everything that we need to either get at home or within our continent, or worst case scenario, within our hemisphere, and the Saudis are kind of left dragging, they would love to have a new security guarantor, but it’s not clear who that 

could be. The Chinese don’t have the reach or the longevity. The French and the Brits don’t have the punch. And the Turks may be closer, but they are on the wrong side of Mesopotamia to make it work. It leaves Saudis in quite a lurch. And the Saudis, from an economic point of view, are struggling with new problems. 

It used to be 20 years ago that OPEC could dominate oil markets by increasing or decreasing. The Saudis always had problems getting countries to follow their quotas. But because Saudi Arabia and their relatively close ally, the United Arab Emirates, always basically agreed on oil policy. You had this huge chunk of spare capacity that could be turned on or off relatively quickly. 

They’re facing two challenges to that now. First, the spare capacity is largely gone. Everyone’s been pumping full out for quite some time. And then second, with shale, you can bring on a new shale. Well, in a matter of weeks, as opposed to having pre invested billions of dollars into spare capacity in Saudi Arabia, which still takes months to turn on. 

So any time that the Saudis would try to flood the market. The shale folks just proved to be a little bit more competitive than the Saudis would have liked. And whenever the Saudis tried to push up prices by gutting the market, the shale folks would just take the market share. And that happened over and over and over and over and over again. 

Second problem the Saudis are facing are is the former Soviet Union, because while Saudi from time to time can bully some of the other producers, into changing their oil policy to meet with the Saudis, one and two, they’ve never been able to do that with the Russians. A lot of the Russian production is in Siberia. It’s very high cost to get out of the ground. 

The Russians have no intention of ever turning it off. A big problem these days is Kazakhstan, where a couple major projects called Tengiz and Kasha gone have really come into their own and made Saudi Arabia more important to oil markets than Kuwait. And they’re never turning that stuff off either. And then Azerbaijan has finally hit its stride with its offshore production. 

So you got three significant players that are just dumping more and more crude on the market. And there’s really not a lot that Saudi can do, which means it’s time for a different sort of strategy. Some people in Saudi thought they could build a giant linear city that everyone would come invest in. Well, that was a stupid idea. 

And so now the Saudis are probably going to rediscover some of their militant roots that they put down in the 1980s with al-Qaida. We have a lot of moving parts in the Middle East. Syria’s one. Iran is one. But what the Saudis really need is for some major oil producers to go off line. And the only tool the Saudis have that is even remotely reliable outside of Europe, opening the spigots is terror attacks. 

This is something the Saudis are very good at. Their own population is basically former horse raiders that decided to settle down and substitute mass rapes and killings for, domestic violence. And now they’re in a position where the only way in the midterm that they can drive oil prices up is to drive someone else out of the market. 

They haven’t decided what the target is yet. But we should expect significant policy change out of Saudi Arabia over the course of the next year, especially now that it’s become apparent to the Saudis that the American relationship really is over. 

When Donald Trump came to Riyadh, recently, he didn’t ask for crude. First time, an American president hasn’t had some conversation with the Saudi royal family about crude oil. He simply said, you need to invest money in the United States if you want us to be involved at all. $600 billion is my number. So I don’t have $600 billion. The idea of them being a cash cow for whatever project in the world is long gone. 

Their population is much larger, their subsidy system for their population is much larger, and their cost for just holding the line are much larger. So the U.S. will be lucky if it gets 150 billion. And the Saudis simply need to change the rules of the game if they’re going to continue with their system in its current form.