石油市场的脆弱性与库存缓冲机制
关于石油市场目前为何没有因为霍尔木兹海峡（Strait of Hormuz）的冲突而出现极端价格飙升，主要原因在于全球库存的“缓冲”作用。与2022年俄罗斯入侵乌克兰导致库存极低、市场紧张的局面不同，2026年初石油市场处于严重的供过于求状态。这种长达一年的库存积累，在当前战争期间发挥了缓冲作用，缓解了直接的极端后果。然而，这些库存并非无穷无尽，目前正在以创纪录的速度消耗。如果霍尔木兹海峡长期关闭，市场平衡将不得不依赖“需求破坏”（Demand Destruction）来重新实现供需平衡，届时油价可能飙升至每桶200美元左右。
Original English Source
So in terms of the negotiation status, it's extremely hard to keep track of. There are a bunch of different variables and factors in these negotiations between Washington and Tehran, and it's kind of like a bouncing ball as to which one is front and centre at the moment, between a complete cessation of hostilities, including Lebanon and Israel, which has been a big sticking point. The status of nuclear talks and kind of where the position, whether or not they come first or later, and then, of course, the status of the Strait of Hormuz and Iran's ongoing control of it.That's the question that's dominated my last couple of months, because I was certainly front and centre talking about the potential that this could drive oil prices upwards of $200 a barrel. And here we are today sitting below $100 a barrel. So what's going on? I think there's a couple of things. Firstly, and very importantly, relative to, say, 2022, the last time we had a big oil crisis when Russia invaded Ukraine, we started that year in 2022 with really, really low oil stocks and a really, really tight market. And that basically Russia kind of pushed us into the danger zone. This at the beginning of 2026, we had a very, very oversupplied oil market. And we had had an oversupplied oil market for upwards of a full year prior to the start of the war. That allowed us to build up a lot of these inventories or stockpiles in the global system that have effectively acted as a buffer. And that, I think, has saved us from the worst of the consequences immediately. But those buffers are still finite by definition, and we're drawing them down now at a record pace.
需求破坏的三种类型
所谓的“需求破坏”并非单一概念，它包含三种不同层级的逻辑。首先是价格弹性需求破坏（Price Elastic Demand Destruction），即当油价高到一定程度，消费者会选择交通替代方案，如骑行或搭乘公共交通。其次是收入弹性需求破坏（Income Elastic Demand Destruction），指高油价导致全球经济衰退，进而导致就业率下降，最终使得通勤和能源消耗需求自然下降。最后是政府强制需求破坏（Government-Mandated Demand Destruction），类似新冠疫情期间的封锁政策，政府通过强制手段削减移动性，以定量配给有限的石油供应。目前市场主要依靠政府干预和战略石油储备（SPR）的注入来维持平衡，而前两种因价格高企而引发的自然需求下降尚不明显。
Original English Source
So demand destruction is a word that we're seeing bandied around a lot right now. And I think, you know, as you note, it's not very tightly defined. So I think it's important here to talk about three different types of demand destruction. What you're talking about, prices are high. So you're considering transit or maybe taking a bike. I actually biked to the studio today. Very good. These are examples of price elastic demand destruction. So the price is too high. So I choose a substitute. There's also income elastic demand destruction which is the price of oil is really high. It strains the global economy. My the job I work at goes bankrupt and I don't have a job to drive to, so I don't drive. That's income elastic demand destruction. The final piece here that's pretty important is government mandated demand destruction. This. Think back to Covid. Think back to those lockdowns. We've seen similar policies enacted across Asia, where the epicentre of this supply loss has occurred, to try and basically ration the available supply. But I think those are the three pieces right now. We're not really seeing much of the first two, which is what we'll need to see if prices, you know, if this deficit continues into the market. And right now, we're still relying heavily on both kind of mandated demand or mobility declines and or the injection of huge volumes of strategic petroleum reserves into the market, which are all, again, finite.加拿大能源管线的战略考量
关于加拿大在能源管道方面的优先级，目前有几项核心项目处于讨论中。虽然扩建现有系统成本更低且审批较容易，且大多通往美国的管道在经济效益上更具竞争力，但过度依赖美国市场使得加拿大能源出口在定价上缺乏话语权。因此，西北海岸油管（Northwest Coast Oil Pipeline）虽然造价高昂，且难以仅靠每桶油的经济回报与南向管道竞争，但其具备极高的战略价值——它能够让加拿大直接进入太平洋盆地。如果该管线终点位于深水港，将能够容纳超大型原油运输船（VLCC: Very Large Crude Carrier，运力极大的油轮）进行直接贸易，从而摆脱对美国中转的依赖，提升加拿大的能源贸易主权，并在面临贸易摩擦时拥有更多的出口选择。
Original English Source
There's really four options right now that people are discussing. You've got an expansion of the Trans Mountain system, 360,000 barrels a day, expansion of the mainline system, about 400,000. There's the Bridger expansion pipeline, or what they're now calling the Prairie Connect or Prairie Link pipeline, which is supposed to connect in with the old Keystone XL assets, the abandoned ones, if you can remember those from a while from a few years back. And then finally, there's this, I think, the main political pipeline in the country right now, which is this Northwest Coast oil pipeline that's being pushed by the Danielle Smith government in Alberta. Each of those have very different kind of, you know, cost benefits to them. Importantly, the ones that head to the states are likely going to be the cheapest and expansions are going to be cheaper than new pipelines, because generally you don't have to cross the Rockies. You know, the environmental permitting is easier. You don't have First Nations concerns in the same way, although you still have some across across the Midwest in the United States. But in general, it's always been cheaper to build southbound into the states, which is why 90 plus percent of our oil has always gone there. But the challenge of that pipeline, and I think that's what the private sector would do if left to its own devices, because they have to prioritize the most profitable barrel, the most profitable route for their shareholders. The challenge is that further entrenches us into the monopsony or essentially the the overwhelming dependence on the US market. It gives the US refiners a lot of market power in pricing discussions. That's where we go to this Northwest Coast oil pipeline. It's going to be expensive, probably upwards of 30 plus billion dollars. If we're using Trans Mountain as our comp, it's a bigger pipeline. It's going to be even less optimal route given the length. That's a very expensive pipeline, and it can't compete on a barrel per barrel basis with those other southbound routes. But importantly, it provides a strategic optionality to access the Pacific basin directly. And if it terminates in a deepwater port, which is what people are hoping for, it allows us to have those big vlq tankers that could service the, let's say, the India trade route.📌 文中提及的人物和组织
公司/组织: IRGC
媒体/书籍: Commodity Context