LNG

Vast_Cricket

I am on the fence. The S&P500 most people bought have almost zero gains. YTD is a +3.5% knowing all AI inspired stocks are knocked down. Gold price already passed historically high last Dec. Similar scenario on precious metals. I guessed alternative energy stocks were returning last year added. Same with weapons. But they are years behind the order so revenues should look good. Only semiconductor etfs have more upside potential. One stock I got out and should have held are container and even LNG ship stocks. The embargo at first bothered the investors but they went back up. In my case I still made gains during the blockade.

Most_Ad_5484

This whole situation is a massive domino effect that people are barely starting to grasp. Seeing 20% of global LNG and 10% of oil just wiped off the map explains why everything from food to EV batteries is about to get insanely expensive. If the Strait stays closed until late 2026, we aren't just looking at high gas prices, we're looking at a complete restructuring of how the world even functions. Scary times ahead

mahend72

this is one of those moments where geopolitics quietly becomes inflation… if ~20% of LNG and a chunk of oil flows stay disrupted via the Strait of Hormuz, it’s not just energy, it cascades into fertilizers to food to chemicals to batteries .. basically the entire industrial stack; feels less like a temporary spike and more like a reset of the global cost base .. are markets underpricing how sticky this risk premium could actually be?

Opposite_Day_9771

Only Intel makes their own high end chips. All other mega cap tech companies design chips but they outsource manufacturing to TSMC in Taiwan. TSMC doesn't design anything. Taiwan imports 90% of oil, LNG and other crucial materials. Lots of it come from the Persian Gulf which is under blockade. You do the math and figure out when they run out supplies. MU and STX are also dependent on East Asia.

lr296

In a perfect world, the platonic world desired by frictionless markets, Iran is resolved tonight, and the world reverts to open energy trading. However, oil extraction can't restart without serious repairs to facilities in Ras Lafan (LNG) and Kuwait (diesel), and insurers simply will not lower rates without a sustained demonstration of security from both the Iranians and the US. So even in our perfect world, oil will not flow from the middle east in the foreseeable future, except at a trickle. Meaning the market rate of oil, even in the perfectest most peaceful world, aint falling below 88. US sweet is profitable at 65.

drummer820

What if I told you that the majority of electricity comes from fossil fuels (largely oil and LNG impacted by the SoH) and that everything from GPUs to RAM has petroleum inputs

Current_Animator7546

Probably would have to go on for another 3-4 weeks imho. Reality will be once Europe has to ration fuel. If things are open then though. It could be more muted, and the market likely looks through it. LNG and Fertilizer may end up being a bigger deal. As less is rerouted. We’re down oil, but a lot is being routed 

kim82352

? Iran's state TV released a list of energy facilities it says will be targeted when the war resumes: > • RasGas and Ras Laffan LNG facilities in Qatar 🇶🇦 > • Das and Zirku Islands in the UAE (major offshore oil and gas hubs) 🇦🇪 > • Abqaiq, Safaniya, and Khurais facilities in Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦 > • Burgan oil field in Kuwai

Sinai

The cost of shipping natural gas worldwide is large, more than the cost of natural gas itself in the US. Moreover, due to political pressures, the infrastructure to export LNG from the US is very limited. On top of that, the US has the most advanced natural gas infrastructure in the world, making export less attractive. The US gas market is independent from the rest of the world for these reasons, and this is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. On top of all that, natural gas and oil do not even serve the same market - natural gas is largely used for energy, and oil is driven by the transport market, with everything else essentially being a waste product being upcycled as feedstock. Indeed, in most of the world due to lacking infrastructure, natural gas is the waste product of oil. As such, demand for natural gas does not go up if they cannot get oil, because natural gas cannot substitute for oil.

DefiantDelta

mind you TSM is days away from getting their LNG lines rationed lmao this is a generational top

Eresbonitaguey

Nat gas is regionally priced and very seasonal. You’d be better off betting on VG or LNG if you believe that Qatari supply will be offline for a while and not compensated by Russian gas for key markets in Europe and Asia.

Eresbonitaguey

North American natgas isn’t impacted by the war. You have to liquify before shipping (LNG). Many of the customers in asia are also price sensitive so a combination of demand destruction and switching back to coal means that there is less pressure to bid up LNG cargoes.

Crazy_Donkies

Only MU.  Mostly because of the war, potential helium and LNG shortage and America produces their own, and more.   Not a lot.  But I'm thinking it can still hit $580 or $660.

cripky

Thinking about floating LNG as opposed to LNG itself . But one 🌮 is all it takes to destroy the thesis

Fire_bartender

Read a bit before you make dumb comments.. You can't just flip a switch and turn it on. LNG needs to be supercooled which is quite a complex process

Fire_bartender

Because the oil market has already lost 1 billion barrels of oil. This won't be caught up anymore leading to higher oil prices for longer Because in different parts of the world will be physical shortages of refined products like diesel and jet fuel Because due to shortage of urea many farmers have had to reduce their planting which will lead to less food (and thus higher prices) in harvesting season Because there will be a shortage of sulfure helium and other byproducts All this impact is only starting now as all the deliveries that were already on sea when the war started just got delivered the past weeks. Now the pipeline is empty Even if the war ends tomorrow it will take months before production will be fully started up again for undamaged plants. For LNG there will be at least a year lower production in the gulf But yes.. ATH stockmarket looks sensible

enkayen25

Oil is a global commodity with global demand. That is why prices went up in the US. We will always have supply in the US and won't have to resort to fuel rationing like in Europe and in third world countries but prices will stay elevated for a long while. The Strait of Hormuz is still closed to this day. Helium, aluminum, LNG, and fertilizer will also go up.

Gullible_Ad3785

Seems like we've decided to run an experiment on what the global economy looks like with 10% of oil offline indefinitely, plus another LNG hike for funsies in Europe & Asia, and a tech sector bubble in the US markets. Will be interesting to see how this sorts out.

DefiantDelta

one headline about Taiwan rationing helium or LNG and this SOXL nonsense pump gets sent to hell lol

notapersonaltrainer

[The promise of Solar](https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/EnergyPricesElement_Electricity-1.jpeg) [a metric TON of solar](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/China-energy-consumption-by-source.svg) [countries actively trying to get out of multi-year LNG deals](https://www.grandviewresearch.com/static/img/research/liquefied-natural-gas-market.png)

KlicknKlack

Seriously, its so glaringly obvious but I think a lot of western raised people have been hearing the promise of solar for decades now. But they don't realize China has actually invested in the infrastructure to mass produce it. China alone, without accounting for exports has added a metric TON of solar to their grid over the last 3 years. > * 2023: +216.9 GW of Solar > * 2024: +278 GW of Solar > * 2025: +315 GW of Solar There are stories of emerging market countries actively trying to get out of multi-year LNG deals due to explosion of solar installation in their country from the last 2 years. Hell, BYD is another example of a china based company who is exploding onto the scene after decade+ of investment.

Original_Design_3343

NEXT is closer to an LNG developer than a midstream name -- really a project-finance asset. Stock moves on permits, financing, and EPC milestones, not volumes or tariffs. LNG gives you the export story already converting to cash flow. NEXT gives you the same story with execution risk stacked on top. Not a substitute.

thenuttyhazlenut

I bought some LNG a few days ago, along with some QQQ puts as everyone was downvoting me for it saying that there's no way the Iran situation doesn't get better.

Old_Bay_Boy

Appreciate the write-up - tracking ET and LNG currently. Thoughts on $NEXT?

AGIwhen

Because the economy isn't as dependent on oil and gas as it used to be. More GDP is because of the digital economy and the data centres that provide the infrastructure for it all. Electric cars are cheaper with more options than ever available to buy. Wind, solar and battery storage are cheaper than ever. LNG export capacity outside the Middle East has grown dramatically since 2022 so we can do without natural gas from there through a combination of renewables, coal, and non-Hormuz reliant gas supply.

MegalodonBite

Fixed commitment applies to LNG market not oil.

ImpressiveDegree5207

Venture Global for LNG. They will be able to sell over a significant amount of LNG on the spot market.

2Loves2loves

[https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/blog/how-much-oil-does-united-states-import-and-why](https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/blog/how-much-oil-does-united-states-import-and-why) \-we import oil. yes, we also export but we are also an importer. LNG we have more than enough.

LanceBrofman

Iran Is 99% On The Way To A Nuclear Weapon, I’m Buying Nine Energy Service [https://seekingalpha.com/article/4892213](https://seekingalpha.com/article/4892213)  Some have incorrectly assumed that since it took many years for Iran to enrich uranium to 60%, it would take a considerable amount of time for Iran to get to the 90% required for nuclear weapons, especially since much of their nuclear facilities have been destroyed. I have a degree in nuclear engineering, and I know that is not the case. To enrich uranium, separative work, the product of the number of centrifuges employed, the time over which they are employed, and their separative power, must be performed. Separative work is measured in “Separative Work Units,” abbreviated SWU. The separative work that was used to produce Iran’s stockpile of 60% enriched uranium is about 55,330 SWU. The separative work required to further enrich Iran’s stockpile of 60% enriched uranium to 90% required for bombs, is only 564 SWU, about 1% of the 55,330 SWU performed already. The speed at which Iran can produce enough fissionable for nuclear weapons depends on how many centrifuges Iran still has. On November 28, 2024, Reuters reported, based on an International Atomic Energy Agency report, that “Iran already has well over 10,000 centrifuges operating at two underground plants at Natanz and Fordow and an above-ground pilot plant at Natanz. The report outlined plans to install 32 more cascades, or clusters, of more than 160 machines each and a massive cascade of up to 1,152 advanced IR-6 machines.” If even a minute percentage of Iran’s centrifuges remain, starting from the 60% enriched material, a single cascade of 175 IR-6 centrifuges could produce the “weapons-grade” material needed for one nuclear weapon every 25 days. With more cascades, this would go proportionally faster. Assembling nuclear weapons involves 1940’s technology. The 440.9 kg of 60% enriched uranium that Iran is believed to possess could be enriched enough to produce about six of the relatively mechanically simple and relatively inefficient gun-type atomic bombs such as the one that was dropped on Hiroshima killing about 140,000 people. Or that amount of enriched uranium could be used to produce about sixteen of the relatively mechanically more complex and efficient implosion-type atomic bombs such as the one that was dropped on Nagasaki. Either type would produce an explosion powerful enough to destroy a city or any invasion beachhead. We do not know how many of Iran’s well over 10,000 centrifuges still remain. President Trump seemed to acknowledge that some remained on February 28, 2026. In a speech to the nation that morning, Trump said he initiated “major combat operations” in part because Iran had “attempted to rebuild their nuclear program”. Since then, on March 31, 2026, Trump said “I had one goal,” They will have no nuclear weapon, and that goal has been attained.” That was reported in a New York Times in an article that included “there is no evidence that the United States or Israel has removed or destroyed the country’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade fuel.”  President Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff said that Iran’s negotiators told him it still has roughly 460 kilograms of uranium at 60% enrichment. Witkoff also said Iran holds roughly 10,000 kilograms of total fissionable material, including the 460kg at 60% and another 1,000 kilograms at 20% enriched. Whatever one thinks of President Bush’s invasion of Iraq for the purpose of eliminating their weapons of mass destruction, if there were actually any such weapons in Iraq, they would have been destroyed. Bush never entertained a fantasy that the weapons could be eliminated simply from an air campaign. I do not like the term “weapons of mass destruction” which seems to put poison gas in the same category as nuclear weapons.  Poison gas is nasty stuff. However, it can be mostly defeated with protective gear. Nuclear weapons are the only weapons that possibly might make a war to prevent their falling into the wrong hands, a reasonable choice. **What Happens Next** Multiple additional ceasefires are likely, as both sides want them. Iran likely wants more days to work on their nuclear weapons without harassment from the air. President Trump is sending significant additional troops to the area even during the ceasefires. That could be because there are insufficient forces now in the region to invade Iran now and the Trump administration realizes that it might take an occupation of Iran to eliminate Iran’s nuclear capability. There are several possible scenarios involving an agreement between Iran and other countries regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons programs. I doubt that an agreement as tough as that was reached by the Obama administration, which Trump withdrew from could be agreed to by Iran, but that is possible. Other possibilities could involve Iran “promising” not to develop nuclear weapons without any inspection or possibly a secret side agreement not to detonate any nuclear weapons until after the US elections. Another possibility is that Iran could agree to hand over what it claims is all of its enriched uranium. However, if the current regime remains in power, there would be the possibility that Iran could hide some of enriched uranium. Iran is enormous, about 636,000 square miles. That is more than twice the size of Texas, which is about 268,600 square miles. Iran is larger than Texas, California, Montana, and Illinois combined. Without occupying the country there would not be a way to be sure that Iran is not still concealing some enriched uranium. **Investment Implications** Even without clear intelligence that Iran is building nuclear weapons, hostilities might resume after the series of cease fires ends and on a greater scale. Maj Gen Ali Abdollahi Aliabadi said Iran's armed forces would block Persian Gulf, Sea of Oman and Red Sea traffic in response to the US naval blockade. Iran would not need a navy to prevent vulnerable oil tankers and LNG carriers from using the Persian Gulf, Sea of Oman and Red Sea as they would be within range of Iran’s drones and ballistic missiles. NINE provides cementing services, including blending high-grade cement and water with various solid and liquid additives to create a cement slurry that is pumped between the casing and the wellbore of the well. It also provides open hole and cemented completion tool products, such as liner hangers and accessories, fracture isolation packers, frac sleeves, stage one prep tools, casing flotation tools, specialty open hole float equipment, disk subs, composite cement retainers, and centralizers that provide pinpoint frac sleeve system technologies.  NINE is highly leveraged to drilling activity in North America, which is in turn depends on the prices for oil and gas. So far drilling, as measured by the rig count, has not responded to the surge in oil prices, as many now consider the surge in oil prices to be transitory. Recently, in the New York Times Mark Finley wrote in *High Gas Prices Won’t End Even if the War Does* Surprisingly, American oil producers don’t seem to be scrambling to ramp up supply to help offset the Middle East outages. A recent survey by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas shows that fewer than a quarter of the companies operating in its district plan to significantly increase drilling this year. (Those looking to ramp up drilling are predominantly smaller companies, though.) Interestingly, on April 16, 2026 the Trump administration urged the oil industry to increase production during a videoconference with senior executives from major operators, including ExxonMobil, Chevron and Continental Resources, as well as independent producers such as Diamondback Energy, Devon Energy and Occidental Petroleum. NINE operates primarily in North America. Thus, it has not suffered from the war as the major international oilfield equipment firms have. For example, the war has prompted SLB to announce that as a result of the war “SLB revenue for the first quarter will be lower than expected, and the company expects to incur additional costs resulting in an impact of approximately 6-9 cents of earnings per diluted share for the first quarter.”  [https://seekingalpha.com/article/4892213](https://seekingalpha.com/article/4892213)   [Nine Energy Service: A Play On A Drilling Resurgence (NYSE:NINE) | Seeking Alpha](https://seekingalpha.com/article/4892213-nine-energy-service-a-play-on-a-drilling-resurgence)

DesticularDorsion

You're underselling the problem. There is a fertilizer shortage as well, plus LNG having issues. Even if everything was 100% peaceful today, production couldn't get back to what we had on February 27th. Oil turbo long.

GideonWainright

Brent june is basically saying this already.  Although still a lot of uncertainty how bad this is going to get.  We don't have a great example of total economy impacts from high oil/LNG prices.  The 70s & 80s had greater energy inputs to outputs.

ParlayTheHard8

10% of oil and a bunch of LNG, ferilizers have been chocked for nearly 2 months now and looks like there’s no opening any time soon!

MoreHuman_ThanHuman

let us not forget about how much LNG flows throughthe straight as well

Ill_Station_6165

Your missing LNG. No matter what happens the gas fields have all been knockout of commission. Taking at least a couple of years till they are able to bring back full capacity. Petrol is one thing but LNG powers the plants and is not priced as global commodity. Suppliers have free-reign to negotiate whatever price they want. VG NEXT LNG WDS GLNG

13jfncjai31

Not even, Ukraine has been bombing the hell out of Russian oil infrastructure as well. Like whether the markets will acknowledge it or not the damage to global oil infrastructure worldwide is insane. There’s been two fires in Mexican refineries, one in Texas, another in one of only two of Australia’s refineries, and a direct terror attack on an Italian LNG pipeline. Once the shock truly hits and its effects are undeniable I cannot see the market justifying its current valuations https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/18/europe/ukraine-strikes-russian-oil-refineries-us-waiver-intl

pigeon_shit

Just watched the new Bloomberg Original on LNG. Long story short - calls $VG

Puzzled-Intern-7897

yes, for about a year and a half. The infrastructure is destroyed and even the finance minister of Qatar said at the IMF Spring Meet that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg of economic damage right now. LNG output will be below max capacity for 3-5 years, as they will have to rebuild the terminals. I haven't seen anything on oil yet, but I assume that we will remain below max capacity for a while. This temporary disruption is not a question of how much, but how long

Puzzleheaded-Arm3155

Just gives me more reason to buy oil and LNG stocks

IvoryTowerResident

Export control on crude and LNG exports

Dramatic_Agency_8721

I think the main difference with Russia's invasion of Ukraine is that there is a reasonable chance of de-escalation and a return somewhat close to the status quo in the short/medium term, aside from the damage to oil/LNG infrastructure which will take longer to resolve.

Cybermeld

Near 20 percent of LNG too.  Markets are in denial how bad this is.

daviddjg0033

Was $148 in Oman on a YouTube video from two weeks ago. Let me tell you a story from last decade and see where I am wrong: Futures are a decaying instrument - look at the April (settled) May, vs Mid July/August vs December and for argument sake the longest dated future. Markets went into backwardation because the marginal buyer of spot oil will pay $150 or higher - depending on supply/demand. Who buys crude in lots of Futures? Two decades ago I read 15% of the cost of oil was not storage - it was speculation. Storage is why I would pay more in those ling dated oil futures because I do not want my tanker to hold oil waiting on the glut of oil my storage carries in normal times and while the government declines to fill the strategic petroleum reserve. Airlines used to be able to buy Futures to hedge against Russia invading Ukraine and starting WWIII in 2014. Utilities could buy LNG contracts in case of a hurricane 🌀 LNG goes from $1 per cubic unit to $3 - or $10 in case tanks start rolling into Europe 2022. A company made more money trading futures than pro iding airline service or a utility believed trading was the solution before AI no growth meant bribing to expand utility areas of coverage or gambling on fossil fuel delivery contracts. Correct me corporate law folks - someone lobbied against an airline gambling on dice that would create a widowmaker trade blow up the Big Utility or Small Airline. One would be planning a trip only to see a whole regional hub disappear because Karen in accounting let Jacob buy more notional than this graph - a fat finger trade - while getting his kicks on with Aubrey in HR. Companies planning to expand outside plant would be stuck with ths bill to create off peak load energy. Someone might even propose the corporations sorry People should pay spot electric prices. Carl Icahn got paid to take delivery of oil when it was negative, paid to have it shipped to refineries and that oil became your OTC and Rx drug, lipstick, dental floss, every carbon compoundchemical you learn in organic chemistry like vinyl or esters anything that can think of - except for those that are easier to start with methane CH4. Not to mention liquid fuels are the only backbone of a superpower that regional powers or Europe needs. Hydrogen, an investable sector defined by $HYDR ETF is next cycle but would compete with free radicals to oxidize the tripled methane our atmosphere holds. Liquid fuels should never be burned for pleasure during good times let alone hot war in Europe longer than WWII times. Ignore my comments about tax breaks during the longest peacetime expansion since WWII because we did not wean ourselves from the fracking companies that did not turn a profit but saved Europe. Nationalization or the story about aluminum and why Reynold exists not just Alcoa is a great topic besides Methane and Carbon dioxide produced by polychain carbon molecules derived from crude like octane. Your Flintstones mobile car burns dinosaurs and plants from the Eonperiodiforgotalomgtimesgosinkedcarbon era. Costs to store commodities today means contango and those back month futures are normally higher than April or May 2026. Backwardation is spot $140 while I can pay $90 for December or $60 for 2027. Geopolitical premium can be higher than 15% because that speculation that adds a cost to the future in last decade was before fracking and the US shale production that saved Europe - not forever - but temporarily from collapsing when the tanks start marching in music emoji. Who wants to go halfs on a tanker for July 2027? I heard there will be a fireworks display. Yuge!

Valueandgrowthare

I personally favor gas producer like EQT and LNG. The baseline is I know the consumption is increasing and demand can barely decline due to expansion of data centers.

blockchainkitty

When Iranian oil is forced offline and Hormuz volatility keeps Brent elevated at $80-90, the pain does not distribute evenly. It distributes hierarchically. In wealthy OECD economies, strategic petroleum reserves, diversified suppliers, long-term contracts, and dollar-printing capacity absorb the shock. The U.S. can release SPR barrels or monetize deficits. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Sub-Saharan African states must purchase refined products on spot markets with collapsing currencies. They do not buy crude; they buy diesel and LNG at premiums they cannot finance. They are priced out entirely. Their factories go dark. Their cold chains fail. Their medicines spoil.

DixieNorrmis

I’m out. Sold all oil and LNG calls. 

staythewaters

4 isn't a cope as much as it's just reality. Euphoric rallies don't erase the reality that there is still a supply crunch directly related to destroying production. All of the affected producing nations have said that this is going to take months, if not a couple of years, to resolve both oil and LNG production shortfalls. Paper market is still far below the physical market. That spread has to be resolved at some point.

-BoldlyGoingNowhere-

With good faith actors, this. With this fucking cabal, it's all about the market manipulation and a deeper play to fuck oil output and LNG shipments from the Middle East. Where are the boats going for product now? Russia has been the petrostate mafia and we are fully recreating that regime in the US, oligarchy included.

Happydumptruck

Maybe tell Canada to stop building the LNG pipeline to China then I guess

Happydumptruck

So long as there is energy demand, there will be fossil fuel demand. Do you think the extraction process for the materials mined use all electric vehicles? lol. We’re just about to have a data centre locally build that’ll be running off local LNG. And bottom line, although I love our planet, I’ve accepted our reliance on fossil fuels to the point that I’d much rather it sources from North America

Happydumptruck

I invested an LNG/crude extraction stock and it’s gone back up I’m betting on the strait being closed for ages, but if not, I still bought at near lower support and there’s decent mid to long term prospect on LNG Canada btw, and the stock is Arc Resources.

PooPooPointBoiz

I'm aware, and yet I've seen article after article that say that AI hallucinates, that it makes errors, and that it is not ready to replace people yet. I just don't get why the "ai hype" is peaking now of all times, in the midst of a war where the global economy is getting fucked from lack of oil, fertilizer, and LNG.

RODjij

Yeah, this seems like total hopium from the market cause the fighting has stopped for the last week. 20% of the global oil production is destroyed or shut down along with the worlds largest LNG producer in Qatar shutting down. I think stuff is so bad right now people have no choice to keep their cash in assets to fight off unemployment & inflation, proping the market up. America is still the worlds financial hub and it still has its benefits in uncertain times. Cause right now investors are fighting with unemployment, AI, inflation, gas pricing, energy pricing, housing & vehicle increases, civil unrest. Practically anything that involves spending money is getting out of control.

Sensitive-Radish-292

That's Europe, and most of the blame falls onto idiotic "green" governments that pushed nuclear out with an over-reliance on LNG. That coupled with poor economical planning and inability to project power is the reason why Europe is fucked. It took them several years and many ... many dead protesters (no the 30k that died this year weren't the only dead ones) to finally acknowledge that the IRGC is a terrorist group, that was actively seeking to get nuclear weapons. Their entire research was focused on ballistic missiles (hint: that's not really a defensive weapon). All war game simulations demonstrated that the first thing they'll do is economic terrorism. They saw this first hand before via their proxy group (houthis). All they had to do -- if not fight along with the US -- is to not oppose the US in their fight. This is the only reason why the IRGC regime has been fighting for close to 3 years (starting with October 7). Reality is that they wanted to see the US bleed, just like the US and EU wanted to see Russia bleed. Instead EU will bleed. You reap what you sow. As someone who grew up and lived in Europe for over 30 years - sincerely fuck the EU. End of story.

TheoryInttro

Taiwan only has 11 days of LNG for electricity production left. TSM uses 9-10% of Taiwans electricity. I think you're overestimating the runway left on the fabs in Taiwan.

GideonWainright

Their problem is LNG reliance, as they're bidding against the asians.  Oil less so since they already tax the fuck out of that. I am guessing they either do a deal with Russia or maybe burn coal and restart the german nuclear reactors?

Running_OutOfTime

Nobody tell the markets that 20% of the world's oil and LNG is stuck in the middle east.

Jazari1

LNG rippin

LightOverWater

Oil flows outside the Strait have increased significantly. Once the Strait is open, you have consistent progress every week in more oil flowing. The world will exceed pre-war oil capacity by Q4. Reddit does not understand the extent of the damage and seems to think taking 2 mbpd of capacity offline means the world is going to end. Markets are foreword-looking; all it needs to know is that the situation is improving. Oil being a physical commodity does have its limits, but as long as the Strait opens in April we'll be perfectly fine. You also do NOT need cheap oil for the economy to thrive. The US economy has proven to be very resilient. We don't need $70 oil. The economy can manage $90 oil perfectly fine. There are plays elsewhere, perhaps in LNG or fertilizer, but oil is actually the one that has the best chance of coming back online. Inflation is not eating away at everything. It takes awhile for inflation to creep up. The risk isn't actually inflation itself, but to the fed raising rates as a consequence.

MarsTellus13

I wrote about basically this on Tuesday and got some positive feedback, lot of shit for writing too much. But yeah I think a lot of heads in the sand forgetting that the fed can't print oil, LNG or helium.

TastyToad

Rough is relative. India and SE Asia are rationing nat gas already. Europe is relatively safe for now but the dependency on LNG imports will bite us in the ass once it's time to refill. (Still the lesser evil tnan directly funding our biggest enemy but it won't be smooth sailing for some time).

Fair-Lie8125

Brooooo that looks just like my account when I was 23 and trying to gamble that LNG prices would skyrocket (they didn’t) Welcome friend.

RichIndependence8930

No they aren't, there is no new drilling happening at a large scale. Oil companies don't consider it worth it to expand right now. ME exporters fixing stuff as fast as possible is still subject to timelines on the parts especially distillation towers and other high complexity equipment. Nonetheless, if the war-that is still going on mind you-starts again and more missiles start falling. Or the Houthis block the Red Sea. People here are acting like its over which is very odd to me. Russia will not do anything that lowers the price of oil or LNG. Why would they? they are making a killing right now. Transit and logistic issues can still be severely negatively impactful. Japan and Taiwan and South Korea won't be seeing any tankers that are now in the Gulf of Mexico for another 50 days for anything bigger than Panamax. And we are stuck loading the VLCCs offshore because their draft is too deep. Even with perfect logistics, the USA is only filling in around 25 percent both LNG and crude of what the ME was putting out through the Hormuz before this. And LNG is a way bigger issue for Japan, who in the worst case scenario will dump US treasuries if this keeps up.

Neemzeh

LNG calls in April? lol.

NazgulSandwich

Even with a deal this doesn't really make sense since infrastructure has been damaged and the oil, fertilizer, and LNG shock as it comes back down will still keep inflation high, cuts further out, and growth low. If missiles start flying again next week are we going to see a circuit breaker if it has fully priced in a deal with full hormuz opening immediately? Who fucking knows.

TastyToad

It's complicated. TL;DR. There's no real time correlation but there's trouble brewing. In my case (Poland) there's a national monopoly that dictates prices of both nat gas and petrol but it's state owned so it cannot do whatever the fuck it wants because the government would bear the blame. So there's some wiggle room. Retail prices are heavily regulated. Industry prices too, to a lesser degree. On top of that there's seasonality. Everyone (except southern Europe maybe) fills up their national storage during summer and empties it up during winter. Then there's climate change. We've had a decade or two of mild winters but this time chicken came home to roost. Polar vortex has broken down and we've had weeks of cold weather not seen since 90s. Nothing is certain in this environment but the risks are pretty obvious: - since cutting off most of the Russian gas supply Europe is heavily dependent on LNG imports - gulf production is disrupted - US is unstable politically, mango could limit the deliveries out of spite - overall macro environment is not good - elevated defense spending could limit the ability of governments to suppress the energy prices

haniyarae

I mean I’m with you, I’m in VG and it’s following LNG pretty closely. I could be very wrong and very dumb but feels like the MMs are trying to offload their AI bags before dumping again. I think LNG’s earnings in the next few weeks will be a reality check. GL!

GailaMonster

when is that "soon"? every country has a different stockpile. China I think has the biggest one. Some countries are already struggling (Ireland was already in a protracted fuel crisis). and this doesn't speak to LNG reserves, which will also need to be full before it gets cold...

DefiantDelta

they have 10 days of LNG reserves left

TastyToad

Don't bother. Bull retards do non-stop victory laps on the upside, disappear if the downside is longer than two days, just to come back and claim they all bought the dip. LNG calls are a solid idea (sadly, for an europoor like myself). I'm at the point of seriously considering adding a heat pump to the mix, might end up cheaper than heating with nat gas only.

Routine-Phrase457

I have that on my watch list because of spot prices in their business model.. but went with LNG because it’s biggest exporter of gas to Europe

ActivatingEMP

Sorry we don't care about the real world here, all that matters is some guy said AI. LNG fueling TSMC? Helium needed for data centers? Global supply chain disruptions as large as COVID? None of that matters hop on

EnglishBrekkie_1604

You clearly aren’t grasping the severity of the situation. Oil isn’t “one thing”, the price of oil is basically the price of energy, and to an economy the price of energy is *everything*. Look at what 10% of oil supply being cut off for half a year did to the global economy in the 70s. This is *at minimum* twice as bad, but it now includes LNG, another vital source of energy, and also impacts fertiliser, which will massively increase the price of food. It is literally the biggest energy shock in human history. You’re also just discarding the possibility that this goes on for months, which isn’t just possible but I’d argue the most likely outcome. The economic consequences of this have the potential to be Great Depression tier. It could get really horrific, it’ll likely cause widespread famine in poorer countries, and it’ll completely ruin both international and US supply chains. It is actually apocalyptic.

jb9310

Loading up on CRK, hopefully people turn towards commodities as general market / tech starts to dump again. 🤞Oil markets are already damaged even if they stop the war today. Natural gas / LNG can be a good replacement in some sectors for months coming.

Jasonrj

Why is the LNG price not set globally like oil?

TheoryInttro

Taiwan has 11 days of LNG left for electricity production, TSM is 9%-10% of Taiwans electricity consumption. I'm not sure you can guide good numbers if the government orders your production shut down to preserve electricity for critical infra. Their non-Taiwan locations will not be affected so production won't go to zero but I have a hard time making a bull case here unless someone can 3D-print some LNG for Taiwan.

PassiveF1st

LNG infrastructure in the middle east set back 3-5 years. BULLISH

duefiori

I mean, the rest of the world will suffer more and it's not even close. It's one of the reasons why I so much despise the way the US conducted itself. Some points: 1. The US is the largest producer of oil in the world. There are some issues with refinement (US refineries are mostly not set for the type of oil extracted in the US), so there will be some economic pain, but it is still a powerful card 2. The US is fully self-sufficient for LNG, and the price is not set globally like oil. Huge benefit 3. Some countries are HEAVILY dependent on gulf oil and LNG. E.g., South Korea imports 70% of its oil from there. 4. Many countries in Asia and Africa are dependent on fertilizers from the gulf. The US might have to rotate crops and take a hit to production, but people are unlikely to starve. The UN estimates that 45M people are going to be at risk of acute hunger because of the war (https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167147), and I guarantee you they are not going to be american 5. Currently the issue is the price of these resources, and when price is the issue rich countries can afford to simply spend more to get them. Poor countries in Asia and Africa are going to get shafted when US and European countries simply buy up the available stock for unaffordable prices. 6. Finally, and this is the biggest point: the issue is currently the price of these resources, but if the war goes long enough (even just a few months), then it turns into a stock issue, i.e. there literally won't be enough resources to satisfy needs. If that happens, the countries listed in the points above are in for an absolute world of pain, not even close to the problems that the US will face.

DefiantDelta

“TSMC consumes 9 percent of the island's total electricity. Taiwan imports 97 percent of its energy. Taiwan has 11 days of LNG reserves left. In May 2025, Taiwan shut down its last nuclear reactor. It replaced the capacity with natural gas.” wow them and the Germans both fucked up bigly

jr-blackridge

This is the LNG demand destruction argument as well. Countries moving energy away from LNG to renewables as real costs increase.

Babyfat101

Yes! There is a ton of destruction that can’t be fixed quickly. Read up on Qatar and LNG, as just 1 example.

lemurtowne

Oil and natural gas are very different commodities. We've also been in an NG/LNG surplus for a while and a lot of refineries are upping production to offset the middle east disruption.

slick2hold

Turmps buddies are pumping the market. 20% of LNG production is offline yet NG is at record multi-year lows. How the f*ck is that happening. I'm not complaining but how the f*ck does that happen? 20% is offline and NG keeps falling.

West_West_313

I had claude trim the fat from this: This Is Fine: Paper Markets vs. Physical Reality Two terms kept surfacing in my head as a mental health professional when this war began: normalcy bias and habituation. The dog in the burning building saying “this is fine” followed shortly after. Humans facing seismic events tend to follow panic with mean reversion, an assumption that things will probably be OK because they always have been. Algorithms do the same thing, not out of malice but design: trained in normal times, and in normal times mean reversion is usually correct. The problem is that abnormal times don’t announce themselves. Infrastructure damage doesn’t heal with the next soundbite, but the algo reverts after either. The IEA flagged the disconnect directly in its April 14 oil market report: physical crude is trading near $150/bbl while futures markets sit far below that, with the gap becoming “increasingly acute.” CLZ26 is at $77. Parts of Qatar’s Ras Laffan, roughly 17% of total LNG export capacity, are offline for 3 to 5 years minimum, constrained by turbine manufacturers with existing backlogs. Force majeure has been declared on long-term contracts through 2031. Europe enters summer refill season with gas storage at 29%, well short of the 80% required for winter, with no Qatari LNG having transited the Strait of Hormuz since February 28. Natural gas prices still dropped 20% on ceasefire headlines despite none of that changing. The paper markets have decided this is a minor geopolitical disruption. The real world, fuel protests in Ireland, rationing in Italy and Slovenia, emergency planning in Australia and New Zealand, hoarding warnings across Africa, disagrees. Earnings season is where these two realities collide. When companies across virtually every sector report skyrocketing input costs and soft guidance simultaneously, the algos will be responding to numbers, not headlines. I don’t expect the collision to be pleasant.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

TheoryInttro

Next earnings for my oil producer that has 75% of their sales in unhedged Brent and spot LNG should be fun. The earnings for the rest of the industrial portfolio that uses diesel, gasoline and LNG as an input not so much. If I even net zero on the whole trade I'll be stunned.

miata_only

Iran COULD charge up to 1 million per oil tanker Fees COULD generate up to 200 million per day LNG tolls COULD bring in more additional revenue Absolutely useless news coverage, you guys

Perfect_Ganache_1959

Yeah, I guess I am mostly suggesting the discrepancy between cost of ad delivery vs profit margin *probably* is so disconnected from true costs that energy price rise due to oil crisis is inconsequential. Alright, so this is PR from them, but you can see they have aligned a lot of energy usage to renewables. https://sustainability.atmeta.com/data-centers/ Even where it's not that - IE: gas turbines chucked into new data centres - US domestic supply of LNG isn't much affected by lack of oil via Iran. Yes, there are second order effects (who's going to buy the ads if there's no products that can be moved cheaply); but I would argue for the medium term, Meta would just keep on trucking. I mean, they know they are getting 10% of their ad revenue from scams; I'd bet they would happily up that to 20% if slowly trialling it on their users and customers showed they can get away with it: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-07/meta-making-billions-from-scam-ads/105983808 Guessing most of those businesses don't have transport or agriculture intensive concerns that are impacted; except for your Temu-like drops hoppers.

SugarDaddyVA

Bullish for oil and LNG producers.  Calls on XOM, CVC, and LNG.  

niaqr

If you want a really good time check out the difference in spot prices for US contracts on LNG vs Asia and European markets. We're flush with the stuff

filthimartini

How are renewables working out for Germany lol. This is a STOCKS sub, take your political views elsewhere. Stupid take. Be silent. The US will profit from this via oil and LNG. SPX is tech weighted, tech is not affected by whatever nonsense is going on in the ME. But maybe you’re a europoor, so good luck to you 🫡

Time_Assistance1933

lol someone who doesn’t understand what 13 million barrels a day of sweet crude going offline means, not to mention helium, LNG, sulfuric acid, urea or aluminum, enjoy the long tail of repairing the hole in your portfolio, every smart money player who understands macro flows appreciates your “long view” and patience with capital loss

BODYBUTCHER

It’s all imported from Canada, and not as LNG

analogdays

LNG export capacity is limited by infrastructure. With exports maxed out and plenty of domestic production, our domestic prices are disconnected from global prices.

BODYBUTCHER

There is only so many LNG terminals in the USA and their capacity is already practically capped. You would need more American LNG terminals to create more demand for American natural gas

JustaBearEnthusiast

I'm not sure I understand. Wouldn't the natural gas being cut off from Russia and now the gulf states drive up demand/price for American natural gas? Or is it some weird thing where they can't use it American products because it LNG vs NG or something?

filthimartini

US equities do not care about the state of the ME. This is a Europe / ME problem. They will have to ration gas and deal with higher costs moreso than the US. SPX is tech weighted. Tech does not care about the goings on of Iran. US will sell more oil and LNG.

WickOfDeath

The answer is quite short: The market cycle is broken. When gold falls on geopolitical events then something is completely broken here, that is a clear sign of "something new". I would stick to those things which have a clear demand / supply cycle like US nat gas or ags. We all know when Trump will (again) impose 50% tariff on China China wont buy US soybeans any more... which are BTW overpriced compared with Brasil or Argentinia. The US had a record harvest, the ending stocks are high, but the next season might yield less so you coudl assume $14 a bushel in May till the crop growth is known (the relation between seeded seeds and grown seeds which highly depends on the seed quality and the biological / cheemical agents used ) Or the US Natgas. I ran an analsis on the additional demand from Europe... which seemed to be shockingly low , some 5% more from the whole domestic US production. Most likely the missing supply from Qatar wasnt in the model. Since Qatar doesnt supply and the Senegal LNG facility isnt online yet the US NG prices might be suprisingly low. Or there happens some "silent buying"...

Icommandyou

Actually amazing markets aren’t freaking the fuck out considering 20% of all oil and who knows how much helium and LNG has been out of supply since last 42 days

Jatobi1993

They have Australia. Malaysia. Nigeria. Indonesia. Algeria. Trinidad. All LNG sellers.

gkibbe

Na, they can play games all they want. But pretty soon people are gonna need that oil and LNG and it isn't gonna be there. Market will wake up all at once, oil production and sales will be nationalized or heavily regulated, lots of investors will loose their shirts before it all gets reorganized.

SlfImpr

For anyone too lazy to ask ChatGPT, I asked ChatGPT, Grok, and Gemini to lay out various scenarios on Middle East conflict. Below is ChatGPT's response (Grok and Gemini weren't as good): \----------- The U.S. blockade looks like a **coercive bargaining move**, not just a shipping-security step. After the April 12 Islamabad talks ended without agreement, Washington appears to be trying to do three things at once: deny Iran the ability to use the Strait of Hormuz as leverage, reassert freedom of navigation through a critical global chokepoint, and force Tehran back into talks from a weaker position on nuclear and regional issues. Reuters and AP report the U.S. specifically tied the move to failed talks, Iran’s tolls/mines/threats in the strait, and unresolved disputes over uranium enrichment and proxies. ([Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-iran-talks-pause-now-disagreements-remain-2026-04-11/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) Why this matters: Hormuz is one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints. EIA says recent Hormuz disruption has been a major driver of higher oil and gasoline prices, and the strait carries a huge share of global oil and LNG flows. ([U.S. Energy Information Administration](https://www.eia.gov/pressroom/releases/press586.php?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) # 1) Why the U.S. put the blockade in place **To break Iran’s leverage.** Iran’s ability to threaten or control passage through Hormuz gives it outsized influence over oil markets and global risk sentiment. The blockade is meant to flip that dynamic and make Iran lose, rather than gain, leverage from the strait. ([Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-iran-talks-pause-now-disagreements-remain-2026-04-11/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **To pressure Iran without immediately expanding to full land war.** A naval blockade is a way to raise pain and show military dominance while stopping short of a much bigger conflict. It is a pressure tactic designed to compel concessions. ([AP News](https://apnews.com/article/da12451198d54f63926d06983b262f98?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **To protect the principle of open shipping lanes.** The U.S. and Gulf producers do not want a precedent where Iran can charge tolls or decide who gets safe passage through an international chokepoint. ([Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/adnoc-ceo-says-strait-hormuz-not-irans-control-2026-04-12/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **To create urgency before the ceasefire window expires.** The ceasefire reportedly runs until April 22, but the talks ended without a framework for what comes next. The blockade raises the cost of delay and forces a choice between renewed diplomacy and renewed escalation. ([AP News](https://apnews.com/article/a8a0d22918fc3fb30bc3abf1cd5c5a13?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) # 2) How this could evolve: short to medium term # Scenario 1: Managed standoff The U.S. enforces the blockade selectively, escorts some shipping, clears mines, and Iran responds with threats and limited harassment but avoids direct major war. Tanker traffic remains impaired but not frozen. This is the most plausible near-term path. Reuters already reported some supertankers resuming transit, suggesting partial normalization rather than total shutdown. ([Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gulf-stocks-slide-us-iran-talks-falter-ceasefire-doubts-resurface-2026-04-12/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **Investor impact:** higher oil, elevated volatility, inflation pressure, and some headwind to richly valued tech through rates. # Scenario 2: Return to talks after a show of force The blockade may be intended mainly to improve Washington’s negotiating position. If both sides feel the costs are rising too fast, mediation could restart. That would likely bring a relief move in oil and a risk-on bounce in equities. ([AP News](https://apnews.com/article/a8a0d22918fc3fb30bc3abf1cd5c5a13?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **Investor impact:** best-case outcome for U.S. tech; lower oil, easing inflation fears, and better support for growth multiples. # Scenario 3: Prolonged gray-zone conflict No breakthrough, no full war, but repeated incidents: ship seizures, drones, cyberattacks, proxy strikes, and intermittent attacks around the region. This would keep a lasting geopolitical premium in oil even if the strait is not fully closed. ([Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gulf-stocks-slide-us-iran-talks-falter-ceasefire-doubts-resurface-2026-04-12/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **Investor impact:** persistent macro drag. Big-cap quality tech may hold up better than speculative tech, small caps, or cyclical semis. # Scenario 4: Direct naval clash If Iran attacks U.S. naval assets or commercial shipping in a major way, oil could spike sharply and markets could sell off hard. AP reports analysts already expect an extra $5–$10 per barrel from the blockade announcement alone. ([AP News](https://apnews.com/article/da12451198d54f63926d06983b262f98?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **Investor impact:** bad for high-multiple tech in the short run; favorable for energy, defense, and safe-haven trades. # Scenario 5: Broader regional escalation The worst case is that this expands beyond Hormuz into wider proxy conflict involving Lebanon, Gulf infrastructure, or other regional shipping lanes. ([AP News](https://apnews.com/article/a8a0d22918fc3fb30bc3abf1cd5c5a13?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **Investor impact:** this becomes a broader global risk-off event, not just an oil story. # My base case **Short term:** Scenario 1 or 3. A tense U.S. naval posture, partial enforcement, uneven shipping flows, and headline-driven oil/market volatility. ([Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gulf-stocks-slide-us-iran-talks-falter-ceasefire-doubts-resurface-2026-04-12/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) **Medium term:** Scenario 2 or 3. Either the blockade forces renewed talks, or the region settles into a grinding standoff with higher energy prices and recurring volatility. ([AP News](https://apnews.com/article/a8a0d22918fc3fb30bc3abf1cd5c5a13?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) # For a U.S. tech investor, the main transmission channel is: **Oil up -> inflation expectations up -> bond yields up -> tech multiples down.** That is the biggest risk. The direct exposure of U.S. tech to the region is limited; the real issue is macro. In a prolonged standoff, mega-cap cash-generative tech should hold up better than speculative growth, smaller software, or semis that are more cyclical.