The most important line is the last one. Europe has spent three years building energy resilience on the assumption that the next shock would come from Russia. The Hormuz closure is a different kind of shock: it hits the global pricing mechanism, not just the supply chain. Every policy designed for the Russia scenario is now being tested against a threat it was not designed for. That is not a failure of foresight. It is a structural problem: resilience built for one adversary does not automatically transfer to another.
The point about the downstream effects—specifically how a lack of refined oil leads to a shortage of sulphuric acid for metal processing—really highlights the complexity of this crisis. It’s not just about the price at the pump; it’s about the structural damage to industrial output and food security via nitrogen fertilizer production. Given the 200-day recovery estimate you mentioned, do you see this leading to a permanent shift in how nations approach energy sovereignty and maritime security?"
It will definitely reframe energy security as national security. I’d expect more countries to build up domestic reserves to help mitigate future shocks.
The fertilizer dimension is the most underreported angle of this entire crisis. Qatar's Ras Laffan isn't just an LNG facility — it feeds a urea and ammonia supply chain that keeps a billion people fed. European gas stockpiles buy time on heating. Nothing buys time on nitrogen fertilizer once the planting window closes. If Hormuz stays restricted into Q2, we're looking at a food price shock that makes 2022 look contained. The policy conversation is still stuck on crude prices and pump costs. The real damage is accumulating in agricultural input markets where there is no strategic reserve.
Trump mocked Jimmy Carter as the patron saint of national decline…preaching wearing sweaters, energy sacrifice and turning down our thermostats. Yet now, with dramatic energy shocks and chaos in the Middle East, Trump admonishments sound vaguely familiar preaching the same conservation and energy restraint. Is 55 mph next?
The most important line is the last one. Europe has spent three years building energy resilience on the assumption that the next shock would come from Russia. The Hormuz closure is a different kind of shock: it hits the global pricing mechanism, not just the supply chain. Every policy designed for the Russia scenario is now being tested against a threat it was not designed for. That is not a failure of foresight. It is a structural problem: resilience built for one adversary does not automatically transfer to another.
The point about the downstream effects—specifically how a lack of refined oil leads to a shortage of sulphuric acid for metal processing—really highlights the complexity of this crisis. It’s not just about the price at the pump; it’s about the structural damage to industrial output and food security via nitrogen fertilizer production. Given the 200-day recovery estimate you mentioned, do you see this leading to a permanent shift in how nations approach energy sovereignty and maritime security?"
It will definitely reframe energy security as national security. I’d expect more countries to build up domestic reserves to help mitigate future shocks.
My take is this is all manufactured so the US can push AI deeper into their infrastructure to actually become the global AI leader, the Iran war is just one strategy by which they are accomplishing this: https://jentryhighland.substack.com/p/the-iran-war-and-the-ai-buildout?r=20e9zy&utm_medium=ios
The fertilizer dimension is the most underreported angle of this entire crisis. Qatar's Ras Laffan isn't just an LNG facility — it feeds a urea and ammonia supply chain that keeps a billion people fed. European gas stockpiles buy time on heating. Nothing buys time on nitrogen fertilizer once the planting window closes. If Hormuz stays restricted into Q2, we're looking at a food price shock that makes 2022 look contained. The policy conversation is still stuck on crude prices and pump costs. The real damage is accumulating in agricultural input markets where there is no strategic reserve.
Trump mocked Jimmy Carter as the patron saint of national decline…preaching wearing sweaters, energy sacrifice and turning down our thermostats. Yet now, with dramatic energy shocks and chaos in the Middle East, Trump admonishments sound vaguely familiar preaching the same conservation and energy restraint. Is 55 mph next?