They are adding to the reserve. It's not instantaneous
by gregmorrissey (2024-03-24 13:54:16)

In reply to: A lot wrong here IMO  posted by DBCooper

Cannot Reply Return to Political

I posted on this a few weeks ago when the same claim was made. The administration is replenishing the reserves and will likely have a net positive affect for the Treasury (sold higher than it cost to replace) depending on whether prices don't spike over the next year or so. My understanding is there are physical limitations on how much oil can be pushed back into the SPR.

Reuter's article from January

DOE release from February





We've added back 13M barrels since 08/25/2023 (7 months).
by G.K.Chesterton  (2024-03-24 23:54:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

At that rate, it will take over 12 years to get back to where we were in January 2021, assuming we *never* draw it down at all during that entire time period.

Note that the administration had already drained 58M barrels after it took over before the Russian invasion of Ukraine in Feb. 2024.
My understanding is we've been restrained by maintenance
by gregmorrissey  (2024-03-25 10:55:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

So, I don't think it's correct to extrapolate the recent replenishment rate on a straight-line basis. We've also cancelled some Congress-mandated sales that were to occur over the next few years. I'll admit that I'm suspicious of the "politician math" at work here.

To your argument about supporting domestic production, wouldn't the government basically setting the price floor at $70/barrel support domestic production? What's the point of a reserve if it can't be used to stabilize prices in the event of a destabilizing geopolitical event that had us trying to get Europe to go along with a Russian oil embargo.

Understandably, it only works if we follow through with replenishment. No different than deficit spending in a recession. We all know how good our politicians have been about reducing spending during economic expansion /s.


In general, I interpret attacks on the administration's energy policy as partisan "Fox News" partial truths. Using terms like "allegedly" and "President Kerry" only increases my skepticism of the arguments.