Heeere's Tommy*!

*Norris, obviously

There are energy writers — and publications — whose work I follow with genuine interest and a desire to learn more about that area. There are also energy writers — and publications — I follow mostly for the laughs, and the people writing the IEA reports are not the only ones.

Here’s a recent piece by one of my favourite: Asia's falling crude oil imports challenge 2025 demand forecasts. The author of this story argues in a very determined way that the slump in oil imports to China and India over the first two months of the year spell doom and gloom for oil demand for the rest of the year.

The reasons: “The world's second-largest economy has struggled to build economic growth momentum since emerging from its strict COVID-19 lockdowns, with property construction a key weak sector.

But the rapid switch to electric and hybrid cars has also trimmed gasoline demand growth, and the same is occurring for diesel demand given the increasing adoption of trucks powered by liquefied natural gas.”

This is an admirable attempt at managing a, shall we say, certain narrative aimed at strengthening the perception of a transition going well and oil’s impending demise. Well, it would’ve been admirable if it had contained a few more facts, such as the actual reason for the dip in oil imports, or, as a fellow Oilprice author dubbed it, Biden’s farewell sanctions.

The cost of shipping Russian crude to China tripled following that farewell package, Bloomberg told us all a month ago. That’s kind of bound to affect import volumes and, indeed, affect them it did, but do narrative managers care? No, they do not. They have a narrative to save. Alas, this is getting harder as not just Bloomberg but other transition devotees begin admitting that oil demand remains rather strong. Reuters would probably add “unexpectedly” or “surprisingly” to a headline along these lines. Of course, it’s neither unexpected nor surprising in the least.