Mabux: Global Bunker Prices

LNG BUNKER PAGE
- LNG bunker indexes
- OIL/GAS futures settlements
- LNG bunker news
- LNG fuel energy content
SEE LNG BUNKER INDEXES
MARKET BUNKER PRICES (MBP)
- 400+ ports worldwide
- Bunker Price History available from 2002
- Supplier's contact details
- Price forecast short (1 day) and long (rolling forward 2 years)
- Differentials section: VLSFO/380 HSFO, VLSFO/MGO LS, MGO LS/VLSFO
See Market Bunker Prices
DIGITAL BUNKER PRICES (DBP:ICE/NYMEX)
- Price adjustments to the Bunker Market's volatility instantly
- Completely independent
- Free from price manipulations
- Unique tool to identify overcharge/undercharge prices
See Digital Bunker Prices for free

MABUX ARA LNG Bunker Index
Port LNG$/mton MGO LS$/mton Date
ARA
832.50
0.00
674.00
0.00
Apr 2
Click to see more LNG Bunker Indexes

Port	LNG$/mton	MGO LS$/mton	Date
ARA	832.50	0.00	674.00	0.00	Apr 2

MABUX Global Bunker Index

380HSFO$/mton		VLS FO$/mton		MGO LS$/mton		Date
508.89	+0.35	588.61	+1.00	774.40	+0.41	Apr 2

Click to see Regional Bunker Indexes

MABUX Market Differential Index (MDI)

Correlation between market bunker prices (MBP) and MABUX Digital Bunker Price Benchmark (DBP)

All Indexes in $/mton	380HSFO			VLS FO			MGO LS			Date
All Indexes in $/mton	MBP Index	DBP Index	MDI	MBP Index	DBP Index	MDI	MBP Index	DBP Index	MDI	Date
Rotterdam	458	461	-3	504	524	-20	674	659	+15	Apr 2
Singapore	468	472	-4	538	565	-27	663	692	-29	Apr 2
Fujairah	460	511	-51	532	570	-38	746	845	-99	Apr 2
Houston	447	480	-33	530	602	-72	682	705	-23	Apr 2

Click to see more details

Digital Bunker Prices
Reasons, Mechanism, Benefits
Click to view presentation

Try free for 3 days

Analytical Section
- Daily and Weekly Bunker analyses and Future Curves
- World and regional Bunker indices
- Bunker Price Forecast for 40+ ports
- Digital Bunker Prices
MABUX for Industry
- API for integration with your application, custom solutions available upon demand
- Bunker market analyses upon request for required region or port
- Bunker Price seminars that allow to learn how to use MABUX tools for bunker business
- MABUX Open Bunker Directory features contact details of bunker suppliers, traders and brokers worldwide.
Latest News
- 2025-04-03
  MABUX: Bunker Weekly Outlook, Week 14, 2025.
  At the end of the 14th week, the global bunker indices (MABUX) maintained a moderate upward trend. The 380 HSFO index increased by 5.94 USD, rising from 503.31 USD/MT last week to 508.53 USD/MT, staying above the 500 USD mark. The VLSFO index edged up... Read more At the end of the 14th week, the global bunker indices (MABUX) maintained a moderate upward trend. The 380 HSFO index increased by 5.94 USD, rising from 503.31 USD/MT last week to 508.53 USD/MT, staying above the 500 USD mark. The VLSFO index edged up by 3.85 USD, remaining at 587.68 USD/MT, still below the 600 USD threshold. Meanwhile, the MGO index climbed by 5.94 USD, from 768.81 USD/MT last week to 774.75 USD/MT. However, at the time of writing, there were indications that prices were beginning to trend downward.
  
  The MABUX Global Scrubber Spread (SS)—the price difference between 380 HSFO and VLSFO—continued its moderate decline, dropping by $1.37 from $80.52 last week to $79.15, slipping below the $80.00 mark. The weekly average of the index also saw a slight decrease of $0.15. In Rotterdam, the SS Spread showed growth for the first time in four weeks, rising by $7.00 from $39.00 to $46.00, surpassing the $40.00 threshold. However, the weekly average in the port remained unchanged at $46.00. Meanwhile, in Singapore, the 380 HSFO/VLSFO price difference increased by $15.00, climbing from $51.00 last week to $66.00, with the weekly average in the port rising by $11.84. Overall, SS Spread dynamics indicate signs of a renewed upward trend. However, the indices remain well below the $100.00 breakeven mark, keeping conventional VLSFO more profitable than the 380 HSFO + Scrubber combination. For more details, refer to the “Differentials” section on mabux.com.
  
  Europe is capitalizing on weak Asian demand for liquefied natural gas (LNG) to increase imports to their highest level for this time of year. Lower Asian demand and spot prices are prompting the resale of cargoes to Europe, which, as the heating season ends, must begin replenishing LNG stockpiles depleted by a winter colder than the previous three. Meanwhile, Europe has a short-term window to secure large LNG volumes, as China’s LNG imports are projected to decline this year—the first annual drop since 2022.
  
  As of April 1, European regional storage facilities were 33.59% full, down 0.32% from the previous week and 37.74% lower than at the start of the year (71.33%). With rising average temperatures, gas extraction had virtually ceased. Meanwhile, the European gas benchmark, TTF, continued its moderate growth in Week 14, increasing by €0.895/MWh to €42.450/MWh from €41.555/MWh last week.
  
  The price of LNG as a bunker fuel in the port of Sines (Portugal) experienced a sharp decline at the end of the week, dropping to 787 USD/MT from 874 USD/MT the previous week. Simultaneously, the price gap between LNG and conventional fuel narrowed by March 31, with MGO LS quoted at 736 USD/MT, resulting in a price difference of 51 USD in favor of MGO LS, compared to 147 USD the week prior. More detailed information can be found in the LNG Bunkering section on mabux.com.
  
  At the end of Week 14, the MABUX Market Differential Index (MDI)—which measures the ratio of market bunker prices (MBP) to the MABUX digital bunker benchmark (DBP)—continued its gradual shift towards fuel undervaluation in the 380 HSFO and VLSFO segments.
  
  • 380 HSFO segment: Rotterdam and Singapore moved into the undervalued zone, meaning all four major ports were now undervalued. The weekly average MDI values increased as follows:
  Rotterdam: +8 points
  Singapore: +19 points
  Fujairah: +9 points
  Houston: +4 points
  MDI values in Rotterdam and Singapore were close to the 100% correlation mark between MBP and DBP.
  
  • VLSFO segment: all four selected ports remained undervalued. The weekly average MDI values changed as follows:
  Rotterdam: +10 points
  Singapore: +8 points
  Houston: +12 points
  Fujairah: Unchanged
  
  • MGO LS segment: Rotterdam re-entered the overvalued zone, becoming the only overvalued port, with its weekly average MDI rising by 10 points. The other three ports remained undervalued, with the following increases:
  Singapore: +6 points
  Fujairah: +11 points
  Houston: +4 points
  Rotterdam remained near the 100% correlation mark between MBP and DBP.
  
  The overall trend continues to shift toward undervaluation, with two additional ports in the 380 HSFO segment now classified as undervalued. We anticipate that this trend will dominate the global bunker market in the coming week.
  
  For more details on the correlation between market prices and the MABUX digital benchmark, visit the Digital Bunker Prices section on mabux.com.
  
  The European Commission has released its first report on the inclusion of maritime transport in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). The report provides an initial assessment of the EU ETS's impact since its entry into force in the shipping sector on January 1, 2024, currently covering approximately 12,000 large vessels. The document examines the potential risks of evasion and circumvention of the system’s requirements but finds no evidence that its introduction has caused major market disruptions. Additionally, the Commission has published a separate analysis on the possible inclusion of small vessels between 400 and 5,000 GRT under the EU Regulation on Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV). The analysis reveals that more than 5,300 small vessels, responsible for around 11 million tonnes of CO2 emissions annually, remain outside the legislation’s scope. Including these vessels in the EU ETS could increase regulated emissions by approximately 9% and expand the number of covered vessels by about 42%.
  
  We anticipate the global bunker market remains relatively balanced, minimizing the likelihood of sharp price fluctuations. Next week, a moderate decline in indices is possible, while multidirectional price movements are expected to prevail.
  Source: MABUX
- 2025-04-03
  Oil slump as Trump’s higher-than-expected tariffs expected to crimp demand
  Oil prices fell by as much as 3% on Thursday after U.S. President Donald Trump announced sweeping new tariffs that investors worry will spark a global trade war that will curtail economic growth and limit fuel demand. Brent futures were down $1.60, or... Read more Oil prices fell by as much as 3% on Thursday after U.S. President Donald Trump announced sweeping new tariffs that investors worry will spark a global trade war that will curtail economic growth and limit fuel demand.
  Brent futures were down $1.60, or 2.13%, to $73.35 a barrel by 0331 GMT after dropping by as much as 3.2% earlier, its biggest daily percentage decline since March 5. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude futures were down $1.62, or 2.26%, to $70.09 after slipping by as much as 3.4% earlier.
  Trump on Wednesday unveiled a 10% minimum tariff on most goods imported to the United States, the world’s biggest oil consumer, with much higher duties on products from dozens of countries, kicking into high gear a global trade war that threatens to drive up inflation and stall U.S. and worldwide economic growth.
  "The US tariff announcement clearly caught markets off guard. Pre-announcement speculation suggested a flat 15-20% tariff, but the final decision was more hawkish," Yeap Jun Rong, market strategist at IG, said in an email.
  "For oil prices, the focus now shifts to the global growth outlook, which is likely to be revised downward due to these higher-than-expected tariffs," he added.
  Imports of oil, gas and refined products were exempted from the new tariffs, the White House said on Wednesday.
  The tariffs sent markets reeling on Thursday, with Japan’s Nikkei plunging to an eight-month low, China’s yuan dropped to its lowest levels in seven weeks and stock markets slumped in early Asia trade.
  
  "We know it will be negative for trade, economic growth and thus oil demand growth. But we don’t know how bad it will be as the effects come a little bit down the road," said Bjarne Schieldrop, chief commodities analyst at SEB.
  On Wednesday, UBS analysts cut their oil forecasts by $3 barrels over 2025-2026 to $72 per barrel, citing weaker fundamentals.
  Traders and analysts now expect more price volatility in the near term, as the tariffs may change as countries try to negotiate lower rates or enact retaliatory levies.
  Reinforcing the bearish sentiment, the Energy Information Administration data on Wednesday showed U.S. crude inventories rose by a surprisingly large 6.2 million barrels last week, against analysts’ forecasts for a decline of 2.1 million barrels. [EIA/S]
  © Reuters. FILE PHOTO: A pump jack operates near a gas turbine power plant in the Permian Basin oil field outside of Odessa, Texas, U.S. February 18, 2025. REUTERS/Eli Hartman/File Photo
  Inventories gained amid a surge in imports from Canada, which had expected to be hit with tariffs on its crude shipments to the U.S.
  The EIA data also showed gasoline demand was lower last week and refinery runs were lower at a time of year that plants should be producing more fuel ahead of the summer driving season. Source: Reuters/Investing.com
- 2025-04-03
  One in Five Refineries Faces Shutdown Despite Rising Fuel Demand
  Refineries are switching to biofuels or shutting down due to hostile regulations—but demand for oil products is growing. This could result in either a market imbalance that will make these products more expensive or a geographical imbalance, which those... Read more Refineries are switching to biofuels or shutting down due to hostile regulations—but demand for oil products is growing. This could result in either a market imbalance that will make these products more expensive or a geographical imbalance, which those who care about supply security wouldn’t like.
  
  A total of 101 out of 410 refineries around the world are at risk of getting shut down over the next decade, Wood Mackenzie analysts estimated recently, noting that this number represented 21% of global refining capacity. The reasons for this estimate include peak oil demand that would reduce demand for the output of refineries and high operating costs in places such as Europe, which collect carbon taxes from their energy industry.
  
  Indeed, Wood Mac considers the inflated operating costs of refineries an especially important risk factor for their future prospects, as well as their investments in decarbonization. “Refineries without committed investments in low-carbon technologies, such as carbon capture, energy efficiency upgrades, or alternative fuels, are especially exposed,” the analysts wrote. “Those located in regions with established or escalating carbon pricing costs, including the EU, UK, and Canada, are under the greatest pressure.”
  
  The carbon prices in these jurisdictions are scheduled to rise to three times above the global average by 2035, the analysts also noted, which will likely make the continuation of the life of some refineries in the EU, the UK, and Canada economically nonsensical—unless policies change.
  
  At the end of last year, analysts and traders told Reuters they expected higher diesel prices this year because of refinery closures. At the time the report came out, refiners were experiencing depressed margins across geographies. But with several refineries slated for shutdown this year, things were going to change—which suggests demand for fuel remained stable if not actively growing.
  
  Yet some have forecast demand will grow this year, even as three large refining facilities close: the Grangemouth refinery, Scotland’s only crude processing facility, which is set to close in the second quarter of 2025; LyondellBasell’s Houston oil refinery, and the Los Angeles refinery of Phillips 66, scheduled for closure by the end of next year.
  
  These three represent refining capacity of some 1 million barrels daily. Meanwhile, however, around 800,000 bpd in new refining capacity is set to launch in Asia, strengthening the argument that operating costs are a crucial factor, and so are carbon taxes: Asian countries have nowhere near the stringent carbon tax legislation that the UK, the European Union, and California have. So, these 800,000 bpd in fresh capacity would certainly compensate for the closures, but they are capacity abroad, not at home, and many have come to view this as a potential problem for supply security—hence the EU’s intention to invest directly in LNG production across the world, for instance.
  
  In this context, it is interesting that the Wood Mac analysis points to Europe and China as homes to most refineries that are at risk of closure. While in Europe the top reason seems to be the carbon tax and its effect on operating costs, for China, the chief factor is decarbonization and more specifically the electrification of transport.
  
  Many observers have argued that China’s concerted electrification push and the diversification into LNG-powered trucks would kill a lot of oil demand. Indeed, consumption data suggests there has been an impact. Yet a new refinery just started operating in China a few months ago, and more recently, its second unit started up, adding a fresh 400,000 bpd to the country’s total capacity. It seems demand is not quite dead yet and will not be for some time—especially for those who make their refineries petrochemical complexes, too.
  
  The refining and petrochemical facilities have the best chances of survival, according to Wood Mackenzie. This is because most forecasts for fuel demand, albeit based on policies that are not as immutable as most assume, see a drop in that over the medium term. Most forecasts for plastics, on the other hand, are rather brighter, regardless of climate policies.
  
  If closures proceed as predicted, which is quite likely in the current political context in places such as Europe, the EU, and Canada, there is a risk of fuel shortages emerging, as reported by the U.S. Energy Information Administration in the March edition of its Short-Term Energy Outlook. The reason: while refineries are shutting down, demand for fuels, notably diesel, has repeatedly surprised to the upside. To tackle the potential shortage, the EIA said the U.S. might have to curb fuel exports—because energy supply security is important.
  
  It appears, then, that demand is not the primary reason for refinery closures. With EV sales disappointing and a “revolution” in the electrification of transport never quite really happening, demand for fuels looks rather stable—and still growing despite the unquestionable rise in EVs on roads. So, refinery closures appear motivated by other factors, notably operating costs. These are rising due to openly hostile policies to the energy industry—and the resulting closures are threatening the security of fuel supply and significantly increasing the risk of boosting reliance on imported fuels. Source: Oilprice.com
- 2025-04-03
  Trump Tariffs Leave UK Economy Uncertain
  Nature abhors a vacuum, or so they, or potentially Aristotle, once said. During weeks like this, it feels more accurate to say it’s the news which is doing the abhorring. Speculation has been, understandably, rampant as to the nature, variety, and... Read more Nature abhors a vacuum, or so they, or potentially Aristotle, once said. During weeks like this, it feels more accurate to say it’s the news which is doing the abhorring.
  
  Speculation has been, understandably, rampant as to the nature, variety, and impact of the tariffs the US President Donald Trump is expected to introduce on Wednesday, and just how they might affect everything from Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ fiscal headroom and the price of your supermarket shopping, to Tesla stocks and fears of a global recession.
  
  Trump has already imposed 25 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium imports, with further import taxes on cars and parts arriving in the US set to come in from April 2, in a blow to the UK’s automotive industry and its £7.6bn worth of exports to the US last year.
  
  The so-called ‘Liberation Day’ package of announcements – set to be unveiled in a Rose Garden event at 9pm UK time – is expected to include reciprocal tariffs on countries levying duties on US goods, dashing hopes of the UK’s ‘special relationship’ sparing us.
  
  The Washington Post reported White House aides have drawn up plans for 20 per cent tariffs on most imported goods arriving in the States – but suggested no final decision had yet been taken, leaving question marks over specific sectors or goods facing different rates.
  
  Ultimately, we don’t know – with any ironclad certainty – exactly what Trump might do.
  
  We don’t know exactly when fresh tariffs on the UK or the wider world will take effect, although there will likely be at least some delay between announcing and implementing.
  
  We also don’t know for sure what other countries will do in response – from grinning and bearing it to retaliating with their own tariffs, or negotiating with Trump, like Canada and Mexico – and how Trump will then respond to that in return… and on and on it could go.
  
  Amid the global vacuum of information, stock markets and investors are getting jittery, with the FTSE 100 down 1.3 per cent on Monday. Economists and experts are issuing warnings, including of a hit to consumers from “the burden of higher tariffs” and a “drag on global activity”, as per the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
  
  Far-reaching consequences, no matter what
  
  Myron Jobson, from Interactive Investor, stressed that even if the UK “manages to escape direct levies”, the tariffs “could have far-reaching consequences” for Brits, including impacts on mortgages, corporate investment and jobs, pensions and economic growth.
  
  Business lobby groups such as the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) have warned of the “huge headache for small firms” with “extra costs” causing a “huge ripple effect”.
  
  Policy chairwoman Tina McKenzie urged the government to “consider state assistance” to SMEs as they “navigate the turmoil and help the firms bounce back as going concerns”.
  
  And pollsters at More in Common found most Brits – 59 per cent – when asked said they were very or quite worried about tariffs. Just 11 per cent said they were not worried at all.
  
  No exemption for the UK
  
  So far, so cheery. Ministers – up to and including Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer – have accepted hopes of an exemption ahead of Wednesday have faded, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves warning cabinet there will be an economic “impact”, but ongoing deal talks continue.
  
  Marco Forgione, director-general of the Chartered Institute of Export & International Trade (CIEIT) told me yesterday that he believes the US administration hopes to see a “clear sense of impact from their tariffs”, as Trump focuses on “his America First agenda”.
  
  But he insisted there was a “clear opportunity very soon afterwards we could seal an agreement” and an “appetite in Washington for a trade agreement to be reached”.
  
  Another sliver of silver lining emerged on Tuesday morning when Professor David Miles, from the OBR, suggested to the Treasury committee that a “very limited” trade war, which the UK was not involved in, could perhaps be “very, very mildly positive” for the economy.
  
  Ultimately, Starmer’s approach – maintaining a cordial relationship with the President, pursuing an economic deal, and avoiding “knee-jerk” reaction – has been shaped by the political and economic – not to mention geopolitical – complexities of the situation. There’s little he, or we, can now do, but hold our breath.
  
  Source: Oilprice.com
- 2025-04-03
  MABUX: Global bunker indices to continue irregular changes on Apr.03.
  MABUX World Bunker Index (as index calculated based on current prices for 380 HSFO, VLSFO and MGO), showed a slight upward movement on Apr.02: 380 HSFO - USD/MT - 508.89 (+0.35) VLSFO - USD/MT – 588.61 (+1.00) MGO - USD/MT – 774.40 (+0.41) As... Read more MABUX World Bunker Index (as index calculated based on current prices for 380 HSFO, VLSFO and MGO), showed a slight upward movement on Apr.02:
  
  380 HSFO - USD/MT - 508.89 (+0.35)
  VLSFO - USD/MT – 588.61 (+1.00)
  MGO - USD/MT – 774.40 (+0.41)
  
  As of Apr.02, the MABUX Market Differential Index (MDI), which monitors the correlation between market bunker prices (MBP) and the MABUX Digital Bunker Price Benchmark (DBP), displayed the following trends across key ports: Rotterdam, Singapore, Fujairah, and Houston:
  
  • HSFO segment: All four selected ports were undercharged, with underpricing narrowing by $4 in Rotterdam, $6 in Singapore, $2 in Fujairah, and $2 in Houston. Rotterdam and Singapore remained close to a 100% correlation mark between MBP and DBP.
  
  • VLSFO segment: All ports continued to be undercharged, with margins decreasing by $1 in Rotterdam, $10 in Singapore, and $5 in Fujairah, while increasing by $3 in Houston.
  
  • MGO LS segment: Rotterdam was the only overcharged port in this bunker segment, with the premium rising by $4. The other three ports were undercharged: the discount stayed unchanged in Singapore, narrowed by $2 in Fujairah, and widened by $3 in Houston. Notably, Fujairah’s MDI dropped below the $100 mark.
  
  We do not expect a sustainable trend in the Global bunker market on Apr.03: 380 HSFO – plus 1-3 USD/MT, VLSFO – plus-minus 1-3 USD/MT, MGO LS – plus-minus 1-7 USD/MT.
  Source: MABUX
- 2025-04-03
  Iran's Nuclear Program Sparks Debate in Congress
  US lawmakers and experts at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing underscored a rare bipartisan consensus -- preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons as a top priority. However, divisions remain over how far Washington should go in applying... Read more US lawmakers and experts at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing underscored a rare bipartisan consensus -- preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons as a top priority.
  
  However, divisions remain over how far Washington should go in applying pressure versus pursuing diplomacy.
  
  Republican lawmakers strongly supported the Donald Trump administration’s decision to reinstate the “maximum pressure” campaign that defined his Iran policy during his first term as US president.
  
  “The maximum pressure campaign devastated Iran’s economy and denied it critical resources. A nuclear Iran is not an option,” Subcommittee Chairman Mike Lawler (Republican-New York) said on April 1.
  
  Democratic lawmakers also acknowledged the threat posed by Iran but stressed the importance of diplomacy.
  
  “There is bipartisan understanding of the danger posed by Iran as the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism. We must combine pressure with diplomatic engagement,” Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (Democratic-New York) said.
  
  Three expert witnesses provided testimony on the challenges posed by Iran and the potential consequences of US strategies.
  
  Norman Roule, a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, warned that Iran is advancing its nuclear program and could produce a weapon within months if left unchecked.
  
  “Iran is closer than ever to producing a nuclear weapon,” Roule warned, adding that military strikes could only delay its program. He called for a comprehensive approach that combines sanctions, military readiness, and diplomacy.
  
  Claire Jungman of United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) highlighted the economic toll that sanctions have taken on the country, noting that its economy remains fragile due to inflation and currency devaluation.
  
  She stressed the importance of targeting Iran’s oil trade with China in violation of US sanctions and leveraging its economic vulnerabilities to weaken its support for regional proxies like the US-designated Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah.
  
  Dana Stroul of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy noted that military strikes could escalate into broader conflict and urged Washington to pair pressure tactics with robust diplomacy.
  
  She added that “the pillars of Iran’s security strategy”, including its nuclear program, proxy network, and arsenal of missiles and drones, are “more vulnerable today than ever.”
  
  Trump has threatened to bomb Iran if it fails to reach a deal with Washington. Tehran has dismissed the threat, describing it as an “affront” to peace and security.
  
  Iran last week delivered a formal response to Trump’s letter proposing direct talks to reach a new nuclear deal. Tehran has dismissed direct negotiations as long as the “maximum pressure” campaign is in effect.
  
  Axios reports that the White House is “seriously considering” Iran’s proposal for indirect talks while boosting its military presence in the Middle East.
  
  Addressing Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Committee Chairman Brian Mast (Republican-Florida) said Trump “will work with you to peacefully end” Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
  
  “Or, President Trump will destroy your nuclear weapons and ballistic missile program. You get to choose the remedy,” he said.
  
  Iran maintains its nuclear program is peaceful, but there are growing calls in Iran to weaponize it as a form of deterrence against the United States and Israel. Source: Oilprice.com
- 2025-04-03
  EIA: US Crude Oil Inventories Climb 6.2 Million Barrels
  Crude oil inventories in the United States saw a large increase of 6.2 million barrels during the week ending March 28, according to new data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration released on Wednesday. Crude oil prices were trading up prior... Read more Crude oil inventories in the United States saw a large increase of 6.2 million barrels during the week ending March 28, according to new data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration released on Wednesday.
  
  Crude oil prices were trading up prior to the crude data release by the U.S. Energy Information Administration after the American Petroleum Institute (API) reported on Tuesday a build of 6.037 million barrels in U.S. crude oil inventories amid a small gasoline draw. The Brent benchmark was trading up 0.01% at 10:28 a.m. ET at $74.50—a roughly $1 per barrel increase over this same time last week. The WTI benchmark, meanwhile, was trading up 0.18% at $71.33—a roughly $1.60 per barrel rise over last week’s levels.
  
  For total motor gasoline, the EIA estimated that inventories decreased 1.6 million barrels for the week to March 28, with daily production increasing to an average 9.3 million barrels. This compares with an inventory decrease of 1.4 million barrels for the previous week and an average daily production of 9.2 million barrels.
  
  For middle distillates, the EIA estimated an increase of 300,000 barrels, with production increasing to an average of 4.7 million barrels daily. This compares to an inventory dip of 400,000 barrels in the week prior, when production stood at an average of 4.5 million barrels daily. Distillate inventories are now 6% below the five-year average for this time of year.
  
  Total products supplied over the last four weeks were down week over week for the second week in a row, averaging 20.1 million barrels per day—a 1.2% decrease from this time last year. Distillate products supplied over the last four weeks are up 3.7% compared to this time last year, while gasoline products supplied were down 1.9% from same period last year. Source: Oilprice.com
- 2025-04-03
  Global Crude Oil Shipments Rise Ahead of OPEC+ Supply Boost
  Global seaborne crude oil flows rose in March from February, just ahead of the supply increase coming from OPEC+ in April, oil flows tracking data by Bloomberg showed on Wednesday. Global crude exports averaged 39.92 million barrels per day (bpd) in... Read more Global seaborne crude oil flows rose in March from February, just ahead of the supply increase coming from OPEC+ in April, oil flows tracking data by Bloomberg showed on Wednesday.
  
  Global crude exports averaged 39.92 million barrels per day (bpd) in March, up by 119,000 bpd from February levels, according to the observed shipments tracked by Bloomberg. Flows from Brazil, Canada, and Russia jumped last month from a month earlier, while crude flows from the United States and the North Sea saw large decreases.
  
  Shipments from the world’s top crude exporter, Saudi Arabia, fell by 65,000 bpd to 6.227 million bpd, according to the data compiled by Bloomberg.
  
  Flows from Iraq also dropped by an even larger rate of 144,000 bpd in March, as OPEC’s second-largest producer continues to struggle to keep its production within its quota under the OPEC+ deal.
  
  Brazilian crude shipments surged by 220,000 bpd last month, while Canada’s total oil flows rose by nearly 190,000 bpd, the data showed.
  
  Russian flows rose at all major points of exports, in the Arctic, Pacific, and the Urals blend. Russia’s key buyers – China and India – found workarounds to continue buying Russian crude after the U.S. sanctions on Russian trade and dozens of tankers that upended Russia-to-Asia oil trade earlier this year.
  
  The rise in global shipments of crude comes as the OPEC+ group is opening the taps a little more in April and is set to add 138,000 bpd of production this month.
  
  On April 1, OPEC+ began unwinding the production cuts of 2.2 million bpd that have been in place for more than a year.
  
  Later this week, the Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee (JMMC) of the group will meet to review market developments and potentially recommend production levels for May. The alliance will have to decide whether to push forward with further easing of the cuts or pause the increase in supply. Reports suggest OPEC+ would raise May production levels, too. Source: Oilprice.com
- 2025-04-03
  Oil Drops, Markets Rattle as Trump Unleashes Tariffs
  Oil prices slipped on Wednesday afternoon after initially climbing more than $1 as markets digested a sweeping new round of global tariffs announced by an aggrieved U.S. President Donald Trump from the Rose Garden. The announcement rattled equity... Read more Oil prices slipped on Wednesday afternoon after initially climbing more than $1 as markets digested a sweeping new round of global tariffs announced by an aggrieved U.S. President Donald Trump from the Rose Garden.
  
  The announcement rattled equity markets and fueled uncertainty across commodities, despite initial gains.
  
  Both Brent and WTI crude futures lost ground on Wednesday afternoon, reversing gains made after Trump revealed that a minimum 10% tariff would be imposed on all countries exporting goods to the United States. Additionally, 60 countries with the largest trade imbalances — including China, the European Union, and Vietnam — now face even steeper levies. China, for example, will see its total tariff level soar to 54%, according to the White House.
  
  Despite the broad reach of the new tariffs, the energy sector was largely spared. A White House official confirmed that imports of oil, gas, and refined products are exempt from the measures. Canada — a key U.S. trade partner — was formally exempted from Wednesday’s reciprocal tariff action. However, the White House noted that non-compliant CUSMA (Canada–U.S.–Mexico Agreement) goods would still be subject to a 25% tariff, and non-compliant CUSMA energy and potash exports would face a 10% duty.
  
  While oil markets digested the news with a slight downward turn, broader equity markets saw a sharper reaction. S&P 500 futures dropped 3.5%, while Nasdaq 100 futures tumbled 4.2%, falling below their March 13 intraday lows to levels not seen since last September.
  
  Still, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, speaking on Bloomberg TV, attempted to calm jittery investors, calling the move “the certainty on tariffs markets have long craved.” Bessent urged investors to “embrace the clarity” brought by the administration’s trade position.
  
  For now, while energy markets appear buffered by the exemption, traders remain cautious amid fears that retaliatory measures and a potential global trade slowdown could ultimately weigh on crude demand. Source: Oilprice.com
- 2025-04-03
  U.S. Energy Department Re-Launches Voluntary Staff Exit Program
  U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright is reinstating the so-called Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) to incentivize employees to leave voluntarily before layoffs begin as part of the Trump Administration’s push to reduce the federal workforce and bureaucracy. “This... Read more U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright is reinstating the so-called Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) to incentivize employees to leave voluntarily before layoffs begin as part of the Trump Administration’s push to reduce the federal workforce and bureaucracy.
  
  “This is a difficult but necessary effort to make government more efficient and accountable. In conducting any such exercise, it is important to consider how optimization initiatives could impact DOE personnel,” Secretary Wright wrote in a memo to staff obtained by POLITICO’s E&E News.
  
  “Therefore, to mitigate the effect of potential involuntary separations, I am immediately instituting a DOE Deferred Resignation Program (DRP), which allows for employees to take needed time for future planning while continuing to be paid through the designated period,” Secretary Wright added.
  
  Staffers who agree to opt into the program will be placed on administrative leave until the end of the deferred resignation period – which is September 30, 2025, at the latest – and will continue to receive full salary and benefits.
  
  Energy Department employees have until noon on April 8 to reply to the offer for voluntary resignation, according to the memo cited by E&E News.
  
  Some DOE staff who are involved in national security, public safety, and other essential roles may not be eligible to opt in in this program, according to the emails sent to employees.
  
  The federal workforce reductions are part of President Donald Trump’s plan to cut bureaucracy and make federal agencies more efficient. President Trump issued an executive order in February to reduce the size of the Federal Government, which, the President says, “will minimize Government waste and abuse, reduce inflation, and promote American freedom and innovation.”
  
  The Department of Energy is not the only U.S. federal government department to offer voluntary redundancies, according to emails to staff shared with Reuters.
  
  The Department of Agriculture is also offering the Deferred Resignation Program, as well as early retirement to employees who are at least 50 years old with 20 years of federal service, or any age with 25 years of federal service, according to the email Reuters has seen. Source: Oilprice.com