7 ms·

Never mind this > On March 19, 2020, President Donald Trump directed the Department of Energy to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to maximum capacity, when

by flutas 1mo ago

Never mind this > On March 19, 2020, President Donald Trump directed the Department of Energy to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to maximum capacity, when oil was priced at $24 per barrel. This directive was given to help support domestic oil producers given the impending economic collapse from COVID-19 and extreme drops in international oil markets. However, funding was blocked by Congress, with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer stating that Democrats had blocked a "bailout for big oil". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Petroleum_Reserve_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Petroleum_Reserve_(U...

LightBug1 1mo ago
I'm no fan of Mr Schumer. However, perhaps he was of the opinion that US-Israel wouldn't have been as stupid as they were to go war with Iran in the way that they did.
pingou 1mo ago
Not sure why you’re being downvoted. It seems like it would have been a sensible time to buy back then with such a low price, although of course government spending was already very high due to COVID.
- jubilanti 1mo ago
  > Not sure why you’re being downvoted The only consistent position on US politics that won't get you downvoted on HN is "both parties are dumb."
  - swed420 1mo ago
    > The only consistent position on US politics that won't get you downvoted on HN is "both parties are dumb." As it should be, because they are. Well, not dumb, but both are complicit and essentially operate as a uniparty for capital interests. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty
    - blooalien 1mo ago
      > As it should be, because they are. Well, not dumb, but both are complicit and essentially operate as a uniparty for capital interests. One party is statistically much "dumber" than the other overall, but yeah... Most all of the clowns in D.C. really don't give a rat's ass about anything beyond filling their pockets at the expense of the American people and pushing their (not "We the People") particular individual pet agendas (at the expense of anyone that gets in the way) and anyone that trusts a single damned one of 'em is a gullible fool that shouldn't be trusted to vote. They're all a buncha professional crooks pretending to rule a nation while they actively corrupt every single value this nation's supposedly supposed to stand for. We need to fire 'em all (or jail, depending on circumstances) and hire all new and better folks (ones who actually care about this nation and it's people) to fill their jobs. Same goes for the corporations that basically own them these days.
  - readthenotes1 1mo ago
    We demand the truth?
jubilanti 1mo ago
It was a missed opportunity to top it off from about 625m to 714m barrels. But the Trump administration really shot themselves in the foot by loudly championing it as a bailout for big oil. Trump didn't care about the reserve, he cared about the oil industry. A lot of money was going out the door.
- flutas 1mo ago
  > But the Trump administration really shot themselves in the foot by loudly championing it as a bailout for big oil. For all I hate about him and his admin, the trump admin didn't call it a "bailout" once that I can find (even with the help of AI). The only quotes I can find are Chuck Schumer / Democrats calling it that and no direct quote of Trump saying it. In fact this is what I can find: > On March 13, 2020, Trump described it as purchasing crude oil “at a very good price.” He said filling the reserve would save taxpayers money while also “helping our oil industry.” > On April 3, a reporter directly asked Trump whether oil executives had requested a bailout. Trump answered: “No, they didn’t ask for a bailout. No.” > The “bailout for big oil” wording came from Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats, not Trump. Schumer’s official March 25 press release claimed that the final CARES Act had: “Eliminated $3 billion bailout for big oil.” Would love to be proven wrong here. > Trump didn't care about the reserve, he cared about the oil industry. Does that even make a difference? Either way it's filling the reserve for instances exactly like this, and was blocked by politicians to try and "win" for their party at the expense of every US citizen.
  - khriss 1mo ago
    > Does that even make a difference? Yes, intent matters. As an example, Trump and Republicans spent all of Biden's term complaining about the direct relief provided to the common people.
  - wasabi991011 1mo ago
    > He said filling the reserve would save taxpayers money while also “helping our oil industry.” Didn't use the word "bailout", of course, but imo the meaning is pretty similar
throw0101a 1mo ago
> Never mind this In March 2020 the SPR was at 640 Mbarrels (out of 714M). What was blocked was a US$ 3B line item out of a US$ 2T stimulus budget what would have topped things up to the 714M (a purchase of ~77M). In 2022, ~340Mbarrels (180+30+40+45+20+10+15) were released due to the effects of Russia's invasion of Ukraine (and we still can crazy-high inflation due to energy (and food) prices): * https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2024/mar/why-have-a-strategic-petroleum-reserve https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2024/mar/why-have-... To date in 2026, 172M have been released due to the Iran war: * https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/28/us-strategic-petroleum-reserve-spr-iran-oil-strait-hormuz.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/28/us-strategic-petroleum-reser... Having 77M more would not have been a bad thing, but I'm (a) curious how much it would it would have made a difference now (6 years later), and/or (b) if there was more earlier on if more would have been released in previous events (because more was available to be release: a 'self-fullfillng prophecy' of sorts).

by flutas 1mo ago

LightBug1 1mo ago

I'm no fan of Mr Schumer. However, perhaps he was of the opinion that US-Israel wouldn't have been as stupid as they were to go war with Iran in the way that they did.

pingou 1mo ago

Not sure why you’re being downvoted. It seems like it would have been a sensible time to buy back then with such a low price, although of course government spending was already very high due to COVID.

jubilanti 1mo ago
> Not sure why you’re being downvoted The only consistent position on US politics that won't get you downvoted on HN is "both parties are dumb."
- swed420 1mo ago
  > The only consistent position on US politics that won't get you downvoted on HN is "both parties are dumb." As it should be, because they are. Well, not dumb, but both are complicit and essentially operate as a uniparty for capital interests. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty
  - blooalien 1mo ago
    > As it should be, because they are. Well, not dumb, but both are complicit and essentially operate as a uniparty for capital interests. One party is statistically much "dumber" than the other overall, but yeah... Most all of the clowns in D.C. really don't give a rat's ass about anything beyond filling their pockets at the expense of the American people and pushing their (not "We the People") particular individual pet agendas (at the expense of anyone that gets in the way) and anyone that trusts a single damned one of 'em is a gullible fool that shouldn't be trusted to vote. They're all a buncha professional crooks pretending to rule a nation while they actively corrupt every single value this nation's supposedly supposed to stand for. We need to fire 'em all (or jail, depending on circumstances) and hire all new and better folks (ones who actually care about this nation and it's people) to fill their jobs. Same goes for the corporations that basically own them these days.
- readthenotes1 1mo ago
  We demand the truth?

jubilanti 1mo ago

It was a missed opportunity to top it off from about 625m to 714m barrels. But the Trump administration really shot themselves in the foot by loudly championing it as a bailout for big oil. Trump didn't care about the reserve, he cared about the oil industry. A lot of money was going out the door.

flutas 1mo ago
> But the Trump administration really shot themselves in the foot by loudly championing it as a bailout for big oil. For all I hate about him and his admin, the trump admin didn't call it a "bailout" once that I can find (even with the help of AI). The only quotes I can find are Chuck Schumer / Democrats calling it that and no direct quote of Trump saying it. In fact this is what I can find: > On March 13, 2020, Trump described it as purchasing crude oil “at a very good price.” He said filling the reserve would save taxpayers money while also “helping our oil industry.” > On April 3, a reporter directly asked Trump whether oil executives had requested a bailout. Trump answered: “No, they didn’t ask for a bailout. No.” > The “bailout for big oil” wording came from Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats, not Trump. Schumer’s official March 25 press release claimed that the final CARES Act had: “Eliminated $3 billion bailout for big oil.” Would love to be proven wrong here. > Trump didn't care about the reserve, he cared about the oil industry. Does that even make a difference? Either way it's filling the reserve for instances exactly like this, and was blocked by politicians to try and "win" for their party at the expense of every US citizen.
- khriss 1mo ago
  > Does that even make a difference? Yes, intent matters. As an example, Trump and Republicans spent all of Biden's term complaining about the direct relief provided to the common people.
- wasabi991011 1mo ago
  > He said filling the reserve would save taxpayers money while also “helping our oil industry.” Didn't use the word "bailout", of course, but imo the meaning is pretty similar

throw0101a 1mo ago

> Never mind this In March 2020 the SPR was at 640 Mbarrels (out of 714M). What was blocked was a US$ 3B line item out of a US$ 2T stimulus budget what would have topped things up to the 714M (a purchase of ~77M). In 2022, ~340Mbarrels (180+30+40+45+20+10+15) were released due to the effects of Russia's invasion of Ukraine (and we still can crazy-high inflation due to energy (and food) prices): * https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2024/mar/why-have-a-strategic-petroleum-reserve https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2024/mar/why-have-... To date in 2026, 172M have been released due to the Iran war: * https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/28/us-strategic-petroleum-reserve-spr-iran-oil-strait-hormuz.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/28/us-strategic-petroleum-reser... Having 77M more would not have been a bad thing, but I'm (a) curious how much it would it would have made a difference now (6 years later), and/or (b) if there was more earlier on if more would have been released in previous events (because more was available to be release: a 'self-fullfillng prophecy' of sorts).