Can the oil market survive a forever war with Iran?

The Iran war has lasted far longer than many expected — and so has a functioning oil market.

Despite uncomfortably high fuel prices that have cost the average US household nearly $800 since the war started , crude is mostly getting where it needs to go more than six months into the war. That’s because the market has proven remarkably resilient, by circumventing the Strait of Hormuz with alternative transit routes, leaning on significant crude stockpiles and slashing global oil usage.

There are real questions about whether — and how long — those conditions can hold.

Some oil analysts say the oil market can maintain this new status quo for the foreseeable future, even if the Strait of Hormuz remains neither fully open nor shut. In that scenario, the Trump administration could, in theory, continue its standoff with Iran for an extended period of time.

But others fear the shoestring and bubblegum used to hold the oil market together will eventually fail, depleting global inventories to a “tipping point” level. Energy prices would have nowhere to go but up, perhaps forcing the United States to end the war to prevent economic disaster.

The oil market has weathered the largest-ever supply shock better than many imagined was possible. Oil prices are elevated, but they haven’t reached their all-time highs.

That’s for three reasons, according to a research report published last week by Natasha Kaneva, chief commodities analyst at JPMorgan.

First, the market has managed significant workarounds to bypass or get through the Strait of Hormuz. Saudi Arabia has used pipelines to divert several million barrels of oil a day to ports outside of Iran’s reach, although the recent rapid-fire advances by Iran’s Houthi allies cast doubt on the viability of this Plan B. The US military has coordinated an effort with Gulf states to escort an undercover shuttle operation to get oil through the strait. The United States, Venezuela, Brazil, Guyana and Canada have ramped up their production by roughly 2 million barrels per day, combined.

“Barrels find a way to flow,” said Kaneva.

Second, most countries outside of the United States and China have drawn down their oil inventories far less than anticipated, preserving a stockpile of oil that governments can put to use if the situation grows significantly more dire.

Hector Retamal/AFP/Getty Images

And third, global demand for oil has fallen sharply during the war — by about 5 million barrels per day. Around the world (though not so much in the US), many consumers canceled travel plans, switched to electric cars or started taking the bus. Some businesses encouraged employees to work from home. China is exporting so many electric vehicles that it’s straining global shipping capacity. And a shortage of refining capacity in the Middle East, Russia and China has eroded demand, keeping a lid on crude prices.

Combined, those factors helped counteract the roughly 13 million barrels per day that had been lost during the war. And that new equilibrium could be sustained for quite some time, Kaneva argues. The market is functioning, albeit at a somewhat higher price.

JPMorgan isn’t forecasting a forever war. But if that happens, Kaneva says oil will likely settle around $87 a barrel — well below today’s levels. If the war ends, the bank suspects oil will fall much further to $64 a barrel.

Bob McNally, president and co-founder of Rapidan Energy Group, is more pessimistic. His forecast assumes this is a forever war — or what he calls a “spikey muddle-through” scenario — keeping Brent at $89 a barrel next year.

“We don’t see a full return of Hormuz,” said McNally, who was an energy adviser to President George W. Bush. “A forever war – by jeopardizing the world’s most important supply region – will accelerate the boom in oil and gas prices.”

Although the oil market has settled into a new normal, its patchwork project contains several weak spots that could fail if tested long enough.

The United States and China have relied heavily on their stockpiles of oil to cushion the blow from the war. They’ve held out far longer than expected. A critical storage facility in Cushing, Oklahoma, hit operational minimums in July, at which point physics no longer allows oil companies to easily pump crude through pipelines to deliver it to refineries. Yet Cushing’s reserves have recovered, rising slightly outside the danger zone in recent weeks.

Nick Oxford/Bloomberg/Getty Images

China has very gradually increased its oil imports in recent weeks, but they remain millions of barrels per day lower than they were before the war. Few outside the Chinese government know how much oil the country has in storage, but it’s believed to be around a billion barrels.

At some unknown point in the future, those inventories will be depleted if the war goes on for an extended time, said Hamad Hussain, commodities economist at Capital Economics. That would cause supply and demand to enter an extreme imbalance, potentially sending oil prices much higher — exactly what most analysts thought would happen at the outset of the war.

Sinking inventories probably wouldn’t trigger an immediate price jump, but it would make oil prices significantly more volatile — not this year, but probably by late next year if the status quo holds, said Dan Pickering, founder and chief investment officer at Pickering Energy Partners. That’s because pipeline workarounds can’t be built fast enough, nor will new supply sources like Venezuela be able to adequately compensate forever, he noted.

Another key factor: US military sustainability.

“It’s not the hidden hand of the market. It’s the military finding a way,” said Helima Croft, who leads global commodities at RBC Capital Markets.

Croft, a former CIA analyst, stressed that the might of the US military is not inexhaustible.

“Are we forever in the escort service? That’s a heavy lift. These are costly workarounds.”

Croft suspects the war is stuck in a “grey zone conflict,” one marked by pockets of escalation sandwiched between periods of “difficult calm.” And she noted there is still a real risk of escalation, such as a repeat of the 2019 drone attacks on a Saudi oil field that sent oil skyrocketing.

One CEO of a major bank told CNN that the US-Iran conflict “probably is a forever war.”

“I’m not losing sleep over it, but we should be prepared for that,” the bank CEO said. “A forever war would leave everyone feeling edgy, but after a certain point you realize it’s just the new normal.”

US officials and researchers seem to be preparing for that scenario — or at least a longer-lasting supply shock.

Last week, the US Energy Information Administration concluded that oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz will remain “constrained” throughout the rest of the year.

S&P Global Energy went a step further, saying in a report that it no longer expects Middle East oil production to return to pre-war levels even by the end of next year.

“The market is not returning to calm,” said Jim Burkhard, S&P’s global head of crude oil research. “It is adjusting to the new normal defined by unresolved conflict and persistent maritime risk.”

伊朗战争持续时间远超许多人的预期——而石油市场的正常运转也持续了很长时间。

尽管自战争爆发以来，燃油价格居高不下，平均每个美国家庭每月支出近800美元，但战争持续六个多月后，原油供应基本畅通。这是因为市场展现出了惊人的韧性，通过绕过霍尔木兹海峡的替代运输路线、依靠大量的原油库存以及大幅削减全球石油消费，原油运输得以维持。

这些条件能否持续以及能持续多久，确实存在疑问。

一些石油分析师表示，即使霍尔木兹海峡既不完全开放也不完全关闭，石油市场在可预见的未来也能维持这种新的现状。在这种情况下，理论上，特朗普政府可以与伊朗继续对峙一段时间。

但也有人担心，目前用来维持石油市场稳定的这种权宜之计最终会失效，导致全球库存下降到“临界点”。届时，能源价格将别无选择，只能上涨，这或许会迫使美国结束战争，以避免经济灾难。

石油市场经受住了有史以来最大规模的供应冲击，其表现比许多人预想的要好得多。油价虽然居高不下，但尚未达到历史最高水平。

根据摩根大通首席大宗商品分析师娜塔莎·卡内娃上周发布的一份研究报告，原因有三。

首先，市场已找到多种绕过或穿越霍尔木兹海峡的有效途径。沙特阿拉伯利用管道每天向伊朗控制范围之外的港口输送数百万桶石油，但伊朗胡塞武装盟友近期的快速推进使这一“B计划”的可行性受到质疑。美国军方已与海湾国家协调，护送秘密穿梭运输行动，以将石油运过海峡。美国、委内瑞拉、巴西、圭亚那和加拿大合计已将日产量提高了约200万桶。

“桶总会找到流动的途径，”卡内瓦说道。

其次，除美国和中国以外的大多数国家消耗的石油库存远低于预期，保留了一定数量的石油储备，以便在情况变得更加严峻时，各国政府可以使用这些储备。

赫克托·雷塔马尔/法新社/盖蒂图片社

第三，战争期间全球石油需求大幅下降，日降幅约500万桶。世界各地（美国受影响较小）许多消费者取消了旅行计划，转而使用电动汽车或乘坐公交车。一些企业鼓励员工居家办公。中国出口大量电动汽车，导致全球航运能力紧张。此外，中东、俄罗斯和中国炼油能力的短缺也抑制了需求，从而抑制了原油价格上涨。

这些因素综合起来，有助于抵消战争期间每天约1300万桶的产量损失。卡内瓦认为，这种新的平衡状态可以维持相当长一段时间。市场仍在运转，尽管价格略高。

摩根大通并不预测这场战争会永远持续下去。但如果战争真的爆发，卡内瓦表示，油价可能会稳定在每桶87美元左右——远低于目前的水平。如果战争结束，该行预计油价还会进一步下跌至每桶64美元。

Rapidan Energy Group总裁兼联合创始人鲍勃·麦克纳利则更为悲观。他预测这将是一场旷日持久的战争——或者用他的话来说，是一种“波澜不惊、勉强维持”的局面——明年布伦特原油价格将维持在每桶89美元。

“我们看不到霍尔木兹海峡完全恢复，”曾担任乔治·W·布什总统能源顾问的麦克纳利说。“一场旷日持久的战争——危及世界上最重要的供应区——只会加速石油和天然气价格的飙升。”

尽管石油市场已经稳定下来，但其拼凑而成的体系存在一些薄弱环节，如果经受足够长时间的考验，这些环节可能会失效。

美国和中国严重依赖石油储备来缓冲战争带来的冲击。它们的储备坚持的时间远远超出了预期。位于俄克拉荷马州库欣的关键储油设施在7月份达到了最低运行水平，此时，由于物理定律的限制，石油公司已无法轻易地通过管道将原油输送到炼油厂。然而，库欣的储量已经有所恢复，最近几周略微超过了危险区域。

Nick Oxford/Bloomberg/Getty Images

近几周来，中国的石油进口量稳步增长，但仍比战前水平低数百万桶/日。除中国政府外，鲜有人知晓中国的石油储备量，但据信约为10亿桶。

凯投宏观(Capital Economics)大宗商品经济学家哈马德·侯赛因(Hamad Hussain)表示，如果战争持续下去，这些库存将在未来的某个未知时间点耗尽。这将导致供需严重失衡，并可能推高油价——这正是大多数分析师在战争初期所预期的情况。

皮克林能源合伙公司创始人兼首席投资官丹·皮克林表示，库存下降可能不会立即引发油价飙升，但会显著加剧油价波动——今年不会，但如果现状持续下去，可能要到明年年底才会出现这种情况。他指出，这是因为管道替代设施的建设速度跟不上需求，而且像委内瑞拉这样的新供应来源也无法永远提供足够的补偿。

另一个关键因素：美国军事力量的可持续性。

“这不是市场幕后的操纵，而是军方在寻找办法，”加拿大皇家银行资本市场全球大宗商品主管赫利玛·克罗夫特说道。

前中央情报局分析师克罗夫特强调，美国军力并非无穷无尽。

“难道我们要永远做伴游服务吗？这太难了。这些都是代价高昂的权宜之计。”

克罗夫特怀疑这场战争陷入了“灰色地带冲突”，其特点是局部冲突升级与“艰难的平静期”交替出现。她指出，冲突升级的风险依然存在，例如2019年沙特油田遭无人机袭击导致油价飙升的事件可能重演。

一家大型银行的首席执行官告诉 CNN，美伊冲突“很可能是一场永无休止的战争”。

“我倒不至于为此失眠，但我们应该做好准备，”这位银行首席执行官说道。“一场旷日持久的战争会让每个人都感到焦虑不安，但到了某个时候，你会意识到这只是新的常态。”

美国官员和研究人员似乎正在为这种情况做准备——或者至少是为持续时间更长的供应冲击做准备。

上周，美国能源信息署得出结论，今年剩余时间内，通过霍尔木兹海峡的石油出口将继续受到“限制”。

标普全球能源在一份报告中更进一步表示，即使到明年年底，它也不指望中东石油产量能够恢复到战前水平。

标普全球原油研究主管吉姆·伯克哈德表示：“市场并未恢复平静，而是在适应以未解决的冲突和持续的海上风险为特征的新常态。”