How does a ~20% reduction in oil supply translate to a ~60% increase in price?
2026-04-29 13:53 UTC
Replies (28)
-
@Windex007@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 14:45
If there are 300 life jackets on a sinking ship being sold for $10 each on a ship with 300 people on it. No problem. No, imagine there are only 299 life jackets on that sinking ship. The 2 people who want the last life jacket might be willing to bid quite a bit higher than $10 for it, even though the supply only shrank by a fraction of a percent. In short, supply reduction doesn't carry enough information on its own to imply how much the price will increase. "How fucked are the customers competing to buy the remaining product if they can't get it" is the other key factor.
-
@Weirdfish@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 14:02
From a high level, this is about supply chain disruption and market confidence. This 20% impacts the entire world, and there is no clear time frame to any resolution. Oil is used in almost everything, so the gas at your pump is competing against everything from medical plastics, to jet fuel, lubricants, fertilizer, you name it. Gasoline for vehicles is a very easy place to squeeze out profits in a very uncertain environment.
-
@Know_not_Scotty_does@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 14:21
I posted this in another thread the other day but it bears repeating. It's not even really about the refineries not getting any oil supply. Refineries are setup to use SPECIFIC oil feedstock chemistries, if you try to substitute that oil for a different type (light sweet vs heavy sour or mid mid, etc) the process either doesn't work, or it wastes a significant chunk. To convert a refinery to use a different feedstock, it takes a significant amount of engineering time, then you have to effectively SHUT DOWN the whole unit, redo parts of the equipment, then run it back up, test it, and tweak the process variables. Refineries plan this years out and it takes 6+ months to do if nothing goes wrong. Then, they are basically locked into that new feedstock again. Doing any kind of supply shock like this is dumb for any number of reasons. It's even dumber when the critical components to rework the refineries is in shorter supply because people keep blowing up the existing equipment. Lead times on some of this stuff is in the 20+ month range duing normal times. There will not be an easy adjustment, the 10-20% loss in supply figure is misleading at best. This is going to impact everything that uses oil, plastic, fertilizer, lubricants, valves, electronics, etc and its not going to be a 10-20% impact...
-
@Krono@lemmy.today 2026-04-30 00:42
Think about all the oil you use as a regular person- for heating, transportation, fertilizer for your foods, etc. Now say the price goes up by 20%. Would you, in response, consume 20% less? Would you heat your home 20% less and eat 20% less and go to work 20% less? Of course not. The estimated 20% reduction in worldwide crude production means, somehow, somewhere, as a world we have to use 20% less oil. Then the question is, how high does the price have to rise to force people to consume 20% less? How expensive will it have to get to force people to heat 20% less and eat 20% less and drive 20% less? I don't know, but it's going to get worse, because we aren't there yet.
-
@RamRabbit@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 14:11
Oil products have highly inelastic demand. Most uses for it don't decrease much when prices change. You still drive to work, trucks still deliver goods, furnaces still heat buildings, etc. There are only marginal cases where people can reduce usage: optional trips, driving instead of flying, things of this nature. Because of how marginal these uses are compared to the more mandatory ones, demand does not respond strongly to price changes. Therefore, prices change significantly more quickly. Edit: Demand destruction is a thing, however. Maybe you buy a hybrid or a factory closes. No matter what happens with oil prices next year, that factory is still closed and you are still driving the more gas efficient hybrid.
-
@Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 2026-04-30 09:44
There is actually no reason for those two percentages to be the same, they derive from different concepts. The price balances at the point where demand and supply are equal. If the market was balanced before, and supply shrinks by 20%, that means the price rises until 20% of demand is *priced out of the market*. You can think of it as a bidding war among the 100% of previous demand for the remaining 80% of supply. The 20% poorest, or more precisely the 20% most price-sensitive, on the demand side, loose this bidding war and don't get any of the remaining supply. If 95% of the demand can afford a 20% increase in price, then the bidding war just continues. If 90% of the demand can afford a 35% increase in price, then the bidding war just continues. If 85% of the demand can afford a 50% increase in price, then the bidding war just continues. If 80% of the demand can afford a 60% increase in price, then that's the new balance of the market.
-
@bitteroldcoot@piefed.social 2026-04-29 16:35
Greedflation: Price gouging by corporations during an inflationary period, especially when the underlying cost of production has not risen accordingly. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/greedflation
-
@Lumidaub@feddit.org 2026-04-29 14:02
There's no necessary correlation between actual decrease in ~~scarcity~~ supply and increase in demand because of human psychology. Contrary to what economic theory would have you believe, market participants (consumers/buyers, supplier/sellers) don't (always) behave rationally. When people hear there's going to be a shortage of something, they panic and rapidly increase demand which rapidly raises prices. Alternatively, the oil industry knows that it is basically untouchable as long as we're dependent on oil and can set prices pretty much however they like. "There's a war" is a popular excuse for increases. Edit: decrease in supply, of course.
-
@timestatic@feddit.org 2026-04-29 15:39
Honestly this is just basic economics. If theres less supply but the demand stays the same the prices will continue rising until the demand matches the supply. If you for example say "I will have to buy gas to commute no matter what to make it to work" and many people use fuel like that it will shorten supply and make the prices go higher until people use up less fuel. Ofc I know oil is used for more than just fuel for cars to commute but this is just an illustration. Thats also why subsidizing the prices directly is highly ineffective as it doesn't actually mean there is more supply on the market and no incentive to save money. If people use a more limited supply of oil as if it was much as there is normally this will spike the prices again until supply and demand match again. Most likely direct subsidies go directly to the oil companies. And if many countries do this it turns into a bidding contest basically where every (except the oil companies that still supply) lose
-
@1984@lemmy.today 2026-04-30 06:32
Oil is globally priced so even if you have your own production in America, prices go up there as well. It benefits the producers a lot but leads to higher prices for the ~~slaves~~ consumers. You will therefore have oil in America but Asia and China will have a huge crisis since 80% of the oil from Hormuz goes to those countries, and now its cut off by Americas blockades. So higher prices in America, but it forces China, India, South Korea and Japan to try and buy oil from America. So this war is about making those countries depend on Americas goodwill for resources. If they dont go along with what Trump is saying, no deal.
-
@bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2026-04-29 14:32
[This video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qjvluMnyAw) helped me understand it a bit more. Basically the condition is that there's not an immediate replacement for oil in the things that use it and that usage of oil is not going to drop by 20% to cover the reduction in the supply. Since oil is an inelastic product and we can't significantly reduce the consumption in response to higher prices in the short term, this causes a more steep increase in price to balance the supply/demand.
-
@HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2026-04-30 22:03
There is a concept in economics called price elasticity, which is how the market adjusts to changes in supply and demand. If there are more alternatives for the product or the product is a luxury, the price is usually considered "elastic" as people will stop using the good over paying more for it. Oil is price inelastic. For a lot of equipment, there isn't an immediate substitute for oil and people need oil to do a lot of important economic activities. So, if there is a reduction in supply, a lot of people will pay more money to make sure they get their oil, which drives up prices far more than the lack of supply would normally suggest. That being said, goods are usually more price elastic in the long run. For instance, people might choose an electric car right now over a gas powered car because electric cars now are a lot cheaper in comparison for total use costs.
-
@BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 2026-05-01 01:57
There's a common misunderstanding that reduction of supply by x% will increase price proportionally. This is being taught in basic economy classes but it comes with assumption of preftectly flexible market. This is NOT how things are in real life. In real life manufacturing runs at less than 100% capacity and as long as it's below that number price doesn't move. Manufacturers usually prefer to increase production first and rise prices only after reaching full saturation. Once it happens market turns into auction: prices rapidly grow until somone is unwilling to buy. If demand is inflexible (meaning it doesn't react to price changes by much) this can be very brutal.
-
@unmagical@lemmy.ml 2026-04-29 14:21
If the global demand is 100x and the global supply is 100x all needs are covered. If the global supply drops to 80x then the needs are not covered, and people scramble to get what they need at any expense. As prices rise more and more people look for ways they can avoid the product until a new equilibrium is reached--this percent increase cost is not correlated with the percent decrease supply.
-
@zout@fedia.io 2026-04-29 14:40
Why would a 20% reduction only lead to a 20% price increase? Pricing depends on what people are willing to pay for it. For example, if Rolex were to make 20% more watches, would they still be able to sell at the same price? And not just in the short run, but also in the long run? The market for Rolex would get over saturated, and prices would drop significantly more than 20%. (for Rolex it would be even worse, since they would lose clientele at the high end of the market).
-
@Doom@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 22:12
Part of the problem is gas supply is artificially kept low so the gas companies can increase demand and charge more (eg they intentionally underproduce). Because of that when unpredictable shocks hit the system the prices fluctuate wildly. For example during the pandemic no one was driving and the price of gas dropped dramatically in response. Even going into the negative one beautiful day. The oil companies didn't know this dumb ass war was coming and didn't have the opportunity to adjust production in preparation. It takes time to adjust the supply line. Yes they like high prices, but if they let it get too high people start talking about gross things like bike infrastructure and trains. And countries experiencing energy blackouts start considering solar panels and battery banks from China. OPEC+ doesn't like that. Add to that some oil production infrastructure has been blown up - permanently taking it out of the supply line. The shortages are going to exponentially build because there are backlogs and bidding wars. I'm honestly surprised the gas is still this cheap.
-
@kikutwo@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 14:12
Not all oil is made into gasoline.
-
@Malyca@lemmy.zip 2026-04-29 23:12
It doesn't. The world is full of greedy psychopaths.
-
@Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 14:41
What I find interesting is I was paying $4.30 for premium while regular was $2 something before the stupidity started. Now I pay $4.70-$4.90 for premium and regular is $4ish Regular has gone up far more than premium, I wonder how much diesel has gone up?
-
@quick_snail@feddit.nl 2026-04-30 09:38
Greed.
-
@RoddyStiggs@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2026-04-29 16:39
Because the whole fucking market is a scam to take more money from people.
-
@yesman@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 15:07
You can't pump gas out of an oil well. It has to be transported, refined, transported again, then burned. The price can fluctuate wildly in that time. the 20% is the estimated reality now. the 60% is what the market is betting the real price will be.
-
@Triumph@fedia.io 2026-04-29 14:55
All of the answers around "what people are willing to pay" and "refinery mechanics" are ignoring the massively increased profits that oil companies have enjoyed in Q1 2026. It's gouging. They don't *have* to charge customers more, or shortchange labor, they just *do.* Because they can, with impunity.
-
@HubertManne@piefed.social 2026-04-30 23:32
Its a commodity that only sum can reduce usage of. People who commute to work by car and don't have an alternative can't stop buying much less gas. Maybe they can get a carpool thing going but that is not easy at all. So like countries reducing the work week by a day or make it mandatory wfh will allow many people to reduce 20% but the trucking won't be able to reduce. so people reduce only when the economics force them to. Factories might shutdown if the cost of fuel is over what they can seel for and such.
-
@DishaweslemOride@lemmy.org 2026-04-29 15:39
Its a scam.
-
@Dryad@lemmy.world 2026-04-29 16:26
Capitalism, corporate greed, and oil cartels.
-
@HeroicBillyBishop@lemmy.ca 2026-04-30 09:17
because the system is rigged
-
@chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 2026-05-01 12:30
No, of course not. But that’s not a very charitable take, is it? Obviously the sinking ship situation goes away with the life jackets and the setting for buying the Pokémon cards is more typical, like a convention or a hobby store.