7
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
More Alarmism reporting regarding oil tankers through the Straight of Hormoz
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:27 am
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:27 am
The headline - Energy Rebounding oil exports through Strait of Hormuz are vulnerable to stepped-up Iranian tanker attacks LINK
The story bullet points -
Crude exports through the Strait of Hormuz have increased but only due to a major U.S. military commitment and at a high cost to lives of tanker crews.
Iran, meanwhile, is stepping up its attacks on tankers.
The rebound in exports may be unsustainable in the absence of a negotiated settlement or capitulation by Tehran.
Now the actual details..."Iran attacked roughly two ships for every 100 vessels that crossed the strait" You'd think they were blowing up everything in sight the way the story is headlined
The story bullet points -
Crude exports through the Strait of Hormuz have increased but only due to a major U.S. military commitment and at a high cost to lives of tanker crews.
Iran, meanwhile, is stepping up its attacks on tankers.
The rebound in exports may be unsustainable in the absence of a negotiated settlement or capitulation by Tehran.
Now the actual details..."Iran attacked roughly two ships for every 100 vessels that crossed the strait" You'd think they were blowing up everything in sight the way the story is headlined
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:30 am to sidewalkside
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Total global oil production since 1970 is up 113%. (And U.S. production has nearly tripled since 2008.)
Yet the total number of US refineries in 2026 is 130, down from 319 in 1980. During that time, demand for gasoline has increased significantly because our population grew by an additional 100 million people.
You can pump all the crude oil you want, but if you can’t convert it into gasoline and diesel, it doesn’t matter, at least not for gas prices.
Why did this happen? Because blue states closed refineries to move toward stupid "Net Zero" and "Green New Deal" goals. And Democrat Presidents from Carter to Biden imposed restrictions on refinery construction so draconian that no one could afford to build...if they could even get a permit.
But sure, blame Trump, the first President to actually do something about it. Instead, elect the people who TOLD YOU they wanted to "ban fossil fuels" and push the price of gas over $10/gal., and then relentlessly implemented policies to get us as far in that direction as they could.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:32 am to sidewalkside
The writer of that article is exactly what i would picture him or her to be
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:36 am to sidewalkside
I’m not sure what you consider so alarmist about the article.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:37 am to SDVTiger
quote:
The writer of that article is exactly what i would picture him or her to be
That article is dead on, and it comports with what I think your views are.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:38 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:Then you failed reading comprehension
Mo Jeaux
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:41 am to sidewalkside
quote:
Then you failed reading comprehension
No, I can read just fine. You’re just overly sensitive. Like a leftist who demands a safe space for protection against facts that you find offensive.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:44 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Then you failed reading comprehension
quote:Just proved my point. I'll explain it to you in more simple terms. I didn't say you "can't read" I said you failed reading COMPREHENSION...big difference
No, I can read just fine.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:48 am to sidewalkside
quote:
Just proved my point. I'll explain it to you in more simple terms. I didn't say you "can't read" I said you failed reading COMPREHENSION...big difference
When casting aspersions on someone, it may be helpful to check some resources first. Here’s the definition of “read” for you to peruse. Take the time to look at the various meanings.
Definition of “read” for overly sensitive retards.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:50 am to imjustafatkid
And yet Exxon keeps reporting record profits each quarter. The math ain't mathing.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:51 am to SDVTiger
quote:
The writer of that article is exactly what i would picture him or her to be
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:52 am to Mo Jeaux
Oh No Mo...you just keep digging don't you?
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:54 am to LARancher1991
Exxon profits are from oil exploration and recovery. Gas is probably a very small part of their overall portfolio
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:56 am to imjustafatkid
Why hasn’t the rightwing pols tried to fix the refinery issue?
Why haven’t they made it a massive issue?
“Hey, want lower gas prices and more jobs? Let us tell ya something..”
Why haven’t they made it a massive issue?
“Hey, want lower gas prices and more jobs? Let us tell ya something..”
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:56 am to sidewalkside
quote:
Oh No Mo...you just keep digging don't you?
Yeah, I’m really reaching with that well known propaganda piece known as the Merriam-Webster dictionary.
Your little stupid game notwithstanding, tell us how the article is so alarmist. What bothers you about it? Is the reporting not accurate? I hope you didn’t read the WSJ this morning. There’s a piece in there about refined product level coming out of the Middle East that would make you very, very upset. Your fragile ego won’t be able to handle it. There’s your trigger warning.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 8:58 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Why hasn’t the rightwing pols tried to fix the refinery issue?
Why haven’t they made it a massive issue?
“Hey, want lower gas prices and more jobs? Let us tell ya something..”
If you are in the board room at an oil company, would you build more refineries when you know the morons in the USA are just going to vote every few years against the very people who support your ability to maintain for refineries?
It's simple math here. As long as Democrats are willing to shut down refineries when they gain even the slightest bit of power, and people are stupid enough to vote for this or stay home because the best candidate isn't perfectly aligned with everything those people believe in, it makes no sense to build more refineries.
This post was edited on 10/6/26 at 9:00 am
Posted on 10/6/26 at 9:01 am to MizunoDude
Oil exploration and recovery do account for it's highest profits around 50% but right below that is its refining side at around 40%. The point is like Trump said you have companies like Exxon, Chevron, and Shell taking advantage of what is going on to boost their profits.
Posted on 10/6/26 at 9:03 am to LARancher1991
quote:
And yet Exxon keeps reporting record profits each quarter.
Because oil is at $100/bbl and they’ve grown even bigger since the last time oil was $100, via their acquisition of companies like Pioneer. They also now have Denbury, so they’re making money moving around CO2 for other companies.
So yes..their gross profits during $90-110 oil periods will continue to grow as they buy more companies and assets that can make more money than they lose.
This post was edited on 10/6/26 at 9:06 am
Posted on 10/6/26 at 9:04 am to imjustafatkid
quote:I suppose I wouldn’t.
If you are in the board room at an oil company, would you build more refineries when you know the morons in the USA are just going to vote every few years against the very people who support your ability to maintain for refineries?
But man, that sounds like such an easy W for the right.
Similarity to illegal immigration, it shouldn’t be hard to dominate that issue and completely rip it from the hands of the left.
The left will be buried if they try to import millions again. It’s over for them there. Americans will not tolerate it and if tried again, it will cement how evil they are.
Do the same with refineries. Why would we not want a good amount of refineries?
Posted on 10/6/26 at 9:06 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
But man, that sounds like such an easy W for the right.
You'd think, but "the right" has been pushing for more capacity, and removing roadblocks, for as long as I can remember. As long as Democrats are going to take power every 4-8 years and immediately undo everything, it makes no sense for companies to invest in more infrastructure.
quote:
Why would we not want a good amount of refineries?
The climate change scam has been effective.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News