As OPEC’s efforts to balance the oil market bear fruit, U.S. producers are reaping the benefits – and flooding Europe with a record amount of crude.
Russia paired with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries last year in cutting oil output jointly by 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd), a deal they say has largely rebalanced the market and one that has helped elevate benchmark Brent prices LCOc1 close to four-year highs.
Now, the relatively high prices brought about by that pact, coupled with surging U.S. output, are making it harder to sell Russian, Nigerian and other oil grades in Europe, traders said.
“U.S. oil is on offer everywhere,” said a trader with a Mediterranean refiner, who regularly buys Russian and Caspian Sea crude and has recently started purchasing U.S. oil. “It puts local grades under a lot of pressure.”
U.S. oil output is expected to hit 10.7 million bpd this year, rivaling that of top producers Russia and Saudi Arabia.
In April, U.S. supplies to Europe are set to reach an all-time high of roughly 550,000 bpd (around 2.2 million tonnes), according to the Thomson Reuters Eikon trade flows monitor.
In January-April, U.S. supplies jumped four-fold year-on-year to 6.8 million tonnes, or 68 large Aframax tankers, according to the same data.
Trade sources said U.S. flows to Europe would keep rising, with U.S. barrels increasingly finding homes in foreign refineries, often at the expense of oil from OPEC or Russia.
In 2017, Europe took roughly 7 percent of U.S. crude exports, Reuters data showed, but the proportion has already risen to roughly 12 percent this year.
Top destinations include Britain, Italy and the Netherlands, with traders pointing to large imports by BP, Exxon Mobil and Valero.
(GRAPHIC: U.S. crude oil and condensate supplies to Europe in 2017-2018 by destination – reut.rs/2F9lWRO)
Polish refiners PKN Orlen and Grupa Lotos and Norway’s Statoil are sampling U.S. grades, while other new buyers are likely, David Wech of Vienna-based JBC Energy consultancy said.
“There are a number of customers who still may test U.S. crude oil,” Wech said.
The gains for U.S. suppliers could come as a welcome development for U.S. President Donald Trump, who accused OPEC on Friday of “artificially” boosting oil prices.
I suspect British Petroleum’s geologists are making the most accurate estimates that can be found. They’re likely based on the best methodology and most current data available. People making corporate decisions generally want the best information they can get.
The fact that they aren’t saying what you want to hear doesn’t have any bearing on their reliability.
@Greg: Sure they are Greg. The same people who have been going back into the records and altering the real temperatures down to show future global warming when temperatures are still within the averages.
@Greg: #51 and just what are those instruments and processes? Since you do not know, you are still spreading BS, not facts. True scientists describe their equipment, measuring methodology and confounders. This would be published with their papers. They also would list others who have been able to duplicate their findings. With none of the above, no valid data.
@Greg: I’m not saying they’re wrong. I’m saying you doomsaying liberals will latch on to any frightening “study” that you can find as long as it suits your campaign of control and you are almost always WRONG. Maybe instead of trying to pay someone to concoct a workable premise to impeach Trump, wealthy idiots like Steyer should invest in finding a viable alternative fuel.
@Deplorable Bill: Good advice. Intelligent people with common sense who have a desire to make things better find and use the tools available to them to achieve important goals. Back on the farm, we didn’t have the funds to purchase some of the tools that would improve our operation, so we used what was already available to us even thought they were not ideal. President Trump is a very flawed individual with some significant talent. He has already proved that he can get some things done where more presentable presidents have failed. If never Trumpers and resistant workers are really interested in improving our country and moving it forward, they would get on board and make their ideas known and part of the forward progress instead of being a drag or disrupter.
Unfortunately, these never Trumpters and resistant workers are more interested in themselves. Some of them who consider themselves “public servants” are really nothing more than weasels who suck the blood out of our country.
Just found this!! Makes sense to me. I think the views this mother has about Donald Trump are much like many others and definitely mine. Her characterization of Trump as the “Salty Sailor” or as The Fireman paint an excellent picture!!. She has written many great books about her son and family…Comment from KAREN VAUGHN Mother of Aaron Vaughn, Navy Seal “Sometimes God uses the no-nonsense, salty sailor to get the job done. Appreciating what the man is doing doesn’t mean we worship the salty sailor or even desire to be like the salty sailor. It doesn’t even mean God admires the salty sailor. Maybe He just knows he’s necessary for such a time as this. I believe with all my heart that God placed that salty sailor in the White House and gave this nation one more chance in November 2016. Donald Trump is what he is. He is still the man he was before the election. And without guilt, I very much admire what that salty sailor is accomplishing. He’s not like me. That’s okay with me. I don’t want to be like him. I will never behave like him. I know we’ve NEVER had a man like him lead our nation. It’s crazy and a little mind blowing at times. But I can’t help admire the ability he has to act with his heart rather than a calculated, PC, think tank-screened, carefully edited script. I still believe that is WHY he became our President and WHY he’s been able to handle a landslide of adversity and STILL pass unprecedented amounts of good legislation for our country AND do great works for MANY other nations, including Israel. I’m THRILLED with what he’s doing for my nation, for the cause of Christ (whether intentional or unintentional, doesn’t matter to me), and for the concept of rebuilding America and putting her FIRST. I will not be ashamed of my position because others don’t see him through the same lens. Should it matter to me if a fireman drops an f-bomb while he’s pulling me from a burning building? Would I really care about what came out of his mouth in those moments? Heck no! I’d CARE about what he was DOING. He wasn’t sent there to save my soul and I’m not looking to him for spiritual guidance. All I’m thinking in those moments is, “Thank you, Jesus, for sending the fireman.” I’ll post this article below again for those who still might not understand me.
This man is crass. Okay. He’s not careful with what he says. Okay. You feel offended that he’s not a typical statesman. Okay. But he is rebuilding the nation my son died for… the nation I feared was on a fast track to becoming a hopeless cause. Forgive me if I’m smiling.” KAREN VAUGHN
@Greg: Wow. You know you hit a nerve of honesty and facts when this douche-bag gets triggered.
Trump is kicking ass, and Greg is pissed.
We forgive you, however, little buddy. You know not what you do.
@Greg: Putin doesn’t have “hidden” money. When he became Russian president (dictator) he just had the Russian oil business (put in) that’s what Putin means, in his name. As soon as the next dictator takes over, it will be transferred to his name.
@Greg: #48 Do they adjust historical data, the one that is say at Chicago Ohare which had much more field years back now a blacktop desert. Them using contaminated data, doesnt bother you a little? How about a little contaminated blood for your next transfusion.
Does this statement seem to support any logic? The temperatures from stations that critics claimed were “poorly sited” actually showed slightly cooler maximum daily temperatures compared to the average. I guess that means ICE AGE, as 90 % did not meet standards. Having to chuck all their data wouldnt have any influence on their conclusions?
@Greg: #38
So, let’s look at consumption and production over time. The site I found goes back to 1980 (slightly after Shell geologist M. King Hubble, estimated we would reach ‘Peak Oil’ and production would start to decline) and uses data from the US Energy Information Administration.
In 1980, worldwide crude oil consumption was 59,522.5 thousand barrels/day.
By 2013, worldwide consumption had risen to 90,701.37 thousand barrels/day (https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?product=oil&graph=consumption ).
Hmmm, consumption has increased by a third! How much have we depleted our reserves by the profligate waste that our liberal betters scold us for?
In 1980 the EIA listed proven reserves as 642.16 billion barrels.
Thirty Five years later, in 2015 proven reserves were down to – 1,615.4 billion barrels.
(https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?product=oil&graph=reserves )
That’s right, even with increased usage, proven reserves are more than twice what they were 35 years ago – when Hubble used the ‘best and most recent calculation’ to estimate that by the year 2015 we would be down to about 16% of the 1970 production ‘peak’.
But maybe ‘best and most recent’ estimates by oil company geologists (who, BTW, liberals seem to think are the devil incarnate at any other time) are ‘bester’ now.
Well, given that the definition “…whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument…rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself” specifically states that it consists of attacking someone’s character and/or motive rather than the argument itself – I guess I’m not sure what you’re not sure of.
Out of curiosity, which part of that addresses the ‘substance of the argument’ rather than ‘the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument’?
To get the ‘conspiracy theorist/skeptic/denier’ claim debunked for the next link, note it includes the statement “None of this argues against global warming”. The author is a ‘believer’, his point is the biased reporting of weather events.
It also says “Annual atmospheric CO2 levels have gone up in pretty much a straight line since 1960, if temperatures did the same thing, the link to CO2 would be direct and obvious”.
Which I guess means since the temperatures haven’t gone up in a ‘pretty much straight’ corresponding line, the link to warming may be less ‘progressive’/‘direct and obvious’ than claimed.
The author says ‘it’s complicated’.
I’m shocked, shocked to find out there has been biased reporting occurring about the projected climate crisis du jour