USA success r.e. Iran hinges on....oil storage

[bootsyjam]

Very simple but then the 1000s of news channels pumping out entertainment sorry I mean detailed coverage and analysis don't really want to focus on this rather simple and boring issue.

To explain-oil is NOT meant to stay in the ground once it is tapped. It needs to move out.
If it doesn't then it congeals and can cause huge damage to oil fields.
Can take weeks/months/years to fix, costs a lot of money to repair (if you can even manage to do so) plus in terms of the lost revenue in this period.

And as an extra bonus you won't regain the same capacity that you had before.

Older oil fields are more susceptible to damage. Iran has largely older oil fields.

Countries I.e. Iran do have storage but not huge amounts. It comes out of the ground and it is exported-that's the model. You can cut back on production a bit but not by too much.

So in terms of the blockade the ONLY thing that matters (awful I know) is whether Iran is able to get the oil out/ how fast it is using up the storage that it has.

If they are at capacity then they will fold.
If they are somehow managing to export enough oil to stop their storage capacity from being maxed out fast then they won't

Everything else is just noise.

Oh and no one really knows how much time they have left r.e. capacity.
I would assume the US govt has an idea but who knows. You can use satellites to calculate how low ships are sitting in the water using the shadows they cast but that is the more widely available analysis. Doesn't tell us plebs how much, if any, oil Iran is exporting.

So toss a coin!

If you are correct that US success will hinge on oil storage (and I have read something about that myself though the time scale seems to differ a lot) - surely all the US has to do is drag the war out as long as possible to inflict maximum harm on the IRGCs main source of revenue?

Somewhat against that theory though - Trump does seem quite keen to do a deal.

The geology of Iran and the type of oil is ok for shutting down and restarting oil wells. The gas fields are at risk though. But each well is slightly different.

"TAs the Journal of Petroleum Technology observes, “For the prolific conventional fields in the Middle East, there is very little technical concern about shut-ins and startups.” Indeed, Iranian production rebounded quickly from low levels following the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2016, and post-Covid in 2023.

Iran’s fields do not include most of the cases where production restarts could be difficult: very cold climates (such as Siberia), waxy crudes (such as East Africa), extra-heavy crude (such as Venezuela and Canada), reservoir rocks with swelling clays, fields using chemical or thermal enhanced oil recovery, or hydraulically-fractured shale/tight oil (United States). The exception may be marginal wells with very high water-cuts (that produce a large share of water along with oil), low reservoir pressure, or very old wells with mechanical failures, which do not account for a large fraction of production. Water coning, the excessive ingress of water from the reservoir into the well, is a possible consequence of over-production, not of shutting in wells as some commentary has suggested."

Article is here. And it has plenty of other links to sites that cover the technical stuff.

Iran's Oil Sector Can Likely Weather Production Shut-ins, but Gas Fields Are at Risk - Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA | CGEP %

Yes this is true but one thing Iran is fully aware of is that the global media will breathlessly report anything that Iran says whether it is true or not.
Partly because, by and large, the global media hate Trump (not all outlets) and partly because they jump on anything that is controversial/stressful because it gets eyeballs to your channel.

As for Trump being keen to do a deal, I have no idea and neither does anyone else. Only he knows and what he says might not be what he really thinks. See above for breathless media reporting and endless speculation.

Jonathan Pie once did a great bit about this sort of thing. Can't remember it word for word but it basically highlighted the fact that the media are fed a lot of stories by people with agendas, or who don't actually have all the information or even the correct information, or a combination of both!

When it comes to starting and stopping oil wells there is no need to rely on the Global media, or Iranian media.

I posted a link above from oil experts. That link has other links in it to oil industry journals.

The oil can be stopped and started. The gas wells are problematic, but new wells can be drilled to re-tap them.

Just as well really given that pretty much all oil production in the region has been hit.

Trump does have a problem with wells that can't be shut down however. Texas wells. He is pushing for US production to be increased but the oil companies are pushing back. Because the geology in Texas is not suited to on/off production. There is also the gas issue. Because there is no infrastructure to handle much of the gas, and the oil companies are flaring it. They don't want to do that of course because it is lost money.

So yes, Trump is not being very smart re oil..

This from last year.

Shale oil execs say Trump policies are hurting investment, 'business is broken' (cnbc.com)

To add to my above post, it really does appear that Trump is ignorant of how oil works.

We saw it with VZ. He captured Maduro, then said there would be oil for all. But no, that's not how it works. VZ oil is a tar oil. It needs specific kit to handle it, and very specialised refinaries. The US has these refineries, built on the Gulf coast to hande VZ oil. But after Chavez they had to find a similar oil to put through them. So they used Canadian Sand tar. Spent billions on pipes and infrastructure to get it from Canada to the US Gulf coast.

Then Trump tried to sell the VZ oil. The oil people said no thanks. They just spent billions changing to Canadian. Only Chevron take VZ oil. They never stopped.

But Trump was trying to flog it. For some reason ignoring what he must have been told. That any oil can't be put through any refinery.

And of course the oil price was too low to justify the investment. Then wowser, Trump bombs Iran and oil price shoots up. Trump pushes for oil companies to invest. They still say no.

The oil companies know what they are doing. Trump does not.

When the SoH is closed Trump says buy US oil. But the oil companies can't. Because their refineries that handle Gulf oil need Gulf oil.

This is why the US, although a net exporter of oil, still has to import it. Because different oils produce different amounts of refined products at different costs.

It's free market economics. But Trump appears to be treating it as if it the US is a socialist command economy, while it seems he does not understand any of the technical and financial aspects at all.

Apologies I didn't have time to reply to you yesterday.
I should have added a few extra points.

1. See here https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/13/columbia-university-oil-funding-student-complaint
   Another great example of my Jonathan Pie comment r.e. "someone is telling you something and you don't know if it's true or not." I would say your source of info is certainly not very trustworthy.

2. I don't know what to tell you. Iran's oil fields are mainly old. https://www.meforum.org/mef-observer/iran-admits-its-oil-fields-in-decline
   Older oil fields are more susceptible to damage from shut downs. Water creeps in to the wells. The link I have posted was done in less febrile times so is less likely (not for sure though) to be pushing some sort of agenda unlike your tarnished info source.

3. I am involved in financial markets.
   I have friends who trade the oil and gas sectors. They are plugged in to what is happening free of any political or other bias. It's just information to them.
   My chats with them, which were informed by their researchers/knowledge of the market, are the basis for my original post.

Keep it simple. Iran needs to export oil. If it doesn't it has to shut down production at some point which can cause lasting damage. How much capacity to store their oil/move their oil is the real question. Yes they can cut production to a certain extent but at some point they have to do more than this. Previous shutdowns were more orderly.

JP Morgan estimated there is about 20 days of storage left.

There's this taken from https://yuobserver.org/2025/08/irans-oil-paradox/
Again, an article published in less politically charged Times therefore a bit more agenda free.

"For decades, Iran hasn’t put enough money into its energy system, and it’s been poorly managed. Its old oil refineries, power stations and the lines that carry energy just don’t work well anymore. Almost 40% of the gas and electricity meant for homes simply disappears between where it’s made and where it’s used. Because Iran hasn’t upgraded to newer technology, its huge but aging oil and gas fields are producing less and less.
What all this means for people is that power cuts happen all the time, homes lose gas in winter and electricity goes out in summer. This makes daily life difficult and hurts businesses. Not having reliable energy also causes prices to rise and makes people’s lives harder, to the point where almost a third of Iranians are now living in poverty."

This seems to conflict with your assertions made both here and elsewhere that Iran is some sort of evil genius and Trump is a floundering buffoon. The reality is that both sides are vulnerable BUT on balance the USA holds the cards.

IMO I don't think Iran expected a blockade of Hormuz as they thought they were the only ones who were going to do it. Hence why they always threatened it. I don't think they never expected this tactic to be used on them.

So to sum up-of course there is capacity. Of course there is some sort of contingency in Iran. But as I said, how much of it is the issue along with how much oil is getting out of the country.

Those in the know, the oil traders (and not academics or those with agendas) concur.

And there is one more thing to add.
As yet, the USA has not struck the oil infrastructure. Chuck in that wildcard!

Thank you for posting an interesting alternative viewpoint.

Fair point re that Columbia article I linked, but I did mention that there was loads of links in it to oil journals.

And fair enough. If you say what I posted is old, and about 5 years out of date. That there is new evidence that says the knowledge and experience gained from a century plus years of drilling is out of date, then so be it.

Thing is though. That will not just apply to Iranian wells in the area. They all have similar geology and oils. So if Iran's wells will be messed up, won't the others be too ?

OK you haven't really engaged directly with any of the points that I made in return to yours and have been flippant. Have a good one.

I was just referencing the oil stuff. There are other threads here on the conflict where trump etc are being discussed.

The politico has taken a more historical and practical view on Iran’s storage problem. Historical- in that they have noted how easy / hard it has been for Iran to stop and start production previously eg during COVID. Apparently they were back upto 70% production within weeks.

“Iran has repeatedly shut-in wells due to various crises over the years and knows how to avoid catastrophic damage to its production, said Mills of Qamar Energy. After the blockade is over — even if it has shut in many of its wells — the country is likely to immediately resume about 70 percent of its production and reach capacity within months, he said.”

Practical- as they are suggesting that Iran is also using other modes of storage eg disused oil tankers.

The 20 day storage concern also appears to have been quoted in articles initially in April, so Iran has already shown some flexibility- although their storage problem is only going to get worse.

Not sure how you can discuss the situation without referring to Trump. He never seems to have been one who, from reporting, relies on objective advice unless is suits his goals. @RedTagAlan gives some interesting examples.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/30/trump-bets-on-quick-iran-oil-crunch-experts-see-prolonged-pain-and-rising-costs-00901998

Is that the Reform type thread ? Another poster there just asked twiglets if they had a personal grudge because of an attacking post there. .

No. The Iran US truce thread. Prefaced with I don’t mean to be rude…..

I made a post on the peace deal thread a few hours ago about the US disabling an empty tanker headed to Kharg Island.

So that tanker might have been intended for storage. But at the same time, people are desperate for oil. So the driver might be a combination of Iran needing to move oil, and another nation/refinery needing that oil.

It is also worth noting that the Caspian sea to the north also has tanker fleets that the US can't blockade. This was discussed on another thread a while back where an oil connected poster said it was unlikely that Iran can move much of its central and southern area oil there. Iran has Caspian sea rigs with limited production that does go north though, to railheads in Russia. From Russia rail tankers to China.

Infrastructure to the Caspian is unknown I think.

If it’s bullying then your comment to me could be considered snarky too?

But I think you’ll find the odd snarky comment is ok unlike say, big pile ons with multiple posters all attacking one poster.

I would say one person consistently attacking the same other person is bullying. From what I can gather from these threads is that you like to play fair and abide all the rules, so I thought I’d point it out.

Forewarned is forearmed and all…….

I just found this article re the Caspian route for oil, It's an Indian site, and no idea if any bias etc.

Iran Oil Exports Under US Blockade 2026: Caspian Route, Storage Limits and Well Shutdown Risks (tattvamnews.com)

It agrees with what I posted above. Limited movement of oil. It does say this however:

"The system operates through northern ports such as Amirabad and Neka, from where oil and petroleum products are transported via smaller vessels across the Caspian to Russian ports like Astrakhan and Makhachkala. These flows are largely structured as swap arrangements, with Iran supplying crude or products and Russia compensating with equivalent volumes or refined fuels, which can then be redistributed through its pipeline network or onward into Eurasian markets."

So the Caspian is a route to get fuels into Iran.

And arms as well of course. From Russia. That is worth adding.

Be real, no one is “attacking” anyone.

OP, I'm going to ignore, the red flags of deletions (again!) and the coincidental presence of a certain poster on your thread and reply to your opening post on Iran's storage. As someone with a little knowledge of downstream operations, ⬇ is not 100% true.

To explain-oil is NOT meant to stay in the ground once it is tapped. It needs to move out.
If it doesn't then it congeals and can cause huge damage to oil fields.
Can take weeks/months/years to fix, costs a lot of money to repair

With respect, it could be that your oil trader/analyst friends understand environmental, economic and geopolitical effects on supply and demand and prices, but haven't a clue about actual drilling operations. Or that you have misinterpreted what they have said.

While oil can turn into thick sludge or wax after it is pumped to the surface and exposed to cooler temperatures, it cannot do so thousands of metres underground where high geothermal heat keeps the oil viscous. The bottom-hole temperature doesn't change after drilling operations, and Iran has some HPHT wells at 150C and 10k psi.

Its deepest oilwell is almost 5k metres deep and deep reservoirs contain natural gases that dissolve into the crude keeping it thin. Cooling tho, can happen in the production string but there are cheaper solutions to deal with that, though it can be argued that nothing in O&G drilling is cheap!

On the question of needing storage. Well, they can control production, and I checked with two international drilling managers, and a drilling superintendent currently in the UAE, to make sure my info is correct.

While not ideal (but it is war after all), Iran doesn't even need to cap wells to control production. They can shut it off and do a workover if required to bring it on stream again. True, depleted fields have less pressure so it will cost some money to re-start after a shut in, but that's a moot point post war, as unintended consequences for peace time might actually be investment in new wells with new equipment and new technologies. (Sweeping statement here, but much of the ME seems to operate with old drilling equipment on land rigs!)
CNPC might well increase their investments, given Iran's huge oil reserves.

On Gas storage. Countries in the ME appear to be unconcerned with the environmental impact of burning off excess gas, so Iran can do this till the skies are black if they run out of storage.

IMHO, Iran's storage problem is not the key to the US winning its war/not war. If it were, the US would just sit back and wait it out instead of using up billions of their taxpayers' money on missiles and other weapons to attack the country.

If it was a winnable war, previous presidents would have engaged Iran militarily, but I believe the advice has always been that you can't change a theocracy that way.

So tl;dr@RedTagAlan wasn't wrong in their 'technical' post.

@logicisall

Wow. Thanks for that detailed explanation. My knowledge is drilling holes in metals for machines etc, not the earth's crust, so I was just working from the oil papers I found.

I knew I had seen someone post on these threads that knew about this, and now I remember who.

@logicisall your little dig is incorrect on this occasion as I reported no posts on this thread. You seem to assume I’m the only person who ever reports posts but I see them all the time on MN & even see some of my own posts deleted. So that was a failure of logic as well as of politeness.

The fact that I said “No one is attacking anyone” could have been a clue as to my own opinion on the conversations.

A small point though - the “red flags of deletions” is a strange way of looking at things. It is the person who has had their post deleted who has raised a “red flag” as they have clearly broken a site rule in the opinion of the mods as well as the reporter.

The person reporting a post has done nothing wrong and if you think the site is worse because of the “report” function, maybe take it up with Justine.

Not to be disrespectful to the OP, but the drilling people I showed that quote to all called it BS (actual words used by one of them). But perhaps it's a bit optimistic to expect an oil trader/analyst to know the ins and outs of drilling operations.

Iran's need to earn revenue is undisputed but a separate issue from storage speculation.

Information and disinformation I expect. And no, I am not accusing any poster of anything.

I am finding local internet regulations make it difficult to find detailed information on this. Stuff such as oils viscosity per source, handling equipment needed, and what refineries handle what oils to produce what refined product. Stuff like that.

But from what you posted, I can see the attraction of Gulf oil to the industry. Drill a deep hole and pipe the oil to tankers. Expensive to do yes, but cheaper and easier than other places.

For example, I found an article on VZ crude. A heavy crude. :

"While Venezuelan crude oil appeals to US refineries, the technical challenges associated with refining this type of oil cannot be overlooked. The dense, sulfur-rich nature of Venezuelan crude requires specialized equipment and processes to refine effectively.

US refineries, particularly those located along the Gulf Coast, are among the few in the world equipped to handle such heavy crude. These refineries have invested in advanced technologies that can break down the complex hydrocarbons present in Venezuelan oil, transforming them into valuable products."

Of course, the US Gulf coast refineries can handle VZ crude, because that is what they were built for, pre Chavez. Now they use Canadian Sand tars. Apart from one Chevron plant that never stopped using VZ oil.

The oil drillers are not in the Gulf states as a favour to those nations. They are there because of cost and relative ease of getting the oil out.

But Trump was saying nobody needs Gulf oil now, Everyone can buy US oil or VZ oil instead.

But that is not how it works.

Source for quote (it's a fluff article) :

Why US Refineries Are Drawn to Dense Venezuelan Crude Oils Unique - Fostermak