Iran can go up to two months without oil exports before cutting output, analysts say
Posted by Naurgul@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 68 comments
- U.S. blockade could force Iranian output cuts in weeks to months
- Analysts split over storage availability
- Up to 2 million bpd still feed domestic oil refineries
Iran can withstand a complete halt in oil exports of up to two months before being forced to curb production, analysts said, after the U.S. began blocking shipping in and out of the country's ports on April 13.
The blockade could prevent roughly 2 million barrels per day (bpd) of Iranian crude from reaching its main buyer China.
Any Iranian production shutdowns would add to more than 12 million bpd of supply already disrupted by the regional war, tightening markets further and lifting oil prices.
With its exports blocked, Iran faces having to divert crude into onshore storage tanks. Once those tanks are filled, the OPEC member would be required to curb upstream output.
Consultancy FGE NextantECA estimates Iran has about 90 million barrels of available onshore crude storage capacity, out of total capacity of roughly 122 million barrels.
"Iran can sustain current production of around 3.5 million bpd for roughly two months without exports, extendable to around three months with a modest 500,000 bpd production cut," FGE NextantECA said in a note.
Iranian domestic refineries process about 2 million bpd of oil, they added.
greyetch@reddit
Sorry if this is a dumb question: can't Iran just end the blockade by sinking the US ships?
They still have hypersonic missiles, right? How could the US Navy defend itself from this?
Even if they didn't, they could use drones and artillery, I imagine. So what am I missing, here?
Advanced-Net-8119@reddit
I doubt they would be able to sink our ships, if they could they would have
Solarwinds-123@reddit
They might be able to, or they might not.
Right now, Iran gains a better position by maintaining that uncertainty than they would if they actually found out.
Naurgul@reddit (OP)
In theory, the closer the US puts its ships to Iran the more likely Iran will be able to attack them. And enforcing the blockade definitely puts the ships closer. But the technological difference is so great that I'm not sure if this chance becomes a serious threat or remains a remote possibility.
greyetch@reddit
Why is this a remote threat, though?
The US is blockading Iran. Iran has the ability to sink the US ships... why not just do it?
Obviously I'm not military lol. I just feel like this is a really obvious choice and I'm not seeing anyone discuss it. Which leads me to believe I'm just a dumbass and I'm overlooking something obvious.
Revlar@reddit
There is an acknowledgement that Iran could do that, but Iran doesn't seem interested in escalating the war or giving people in the US a casus belli.
greyetch@reddit
Is it really an escalation to destroy the ships that invade your waters, launch strikes on your people, and blockade your ports?
The US has already launched bombing campaigns without a casus belli. The US even assassinated their leader. I don't think the US needs any kind of formal excuse to do whatever they want anymore. They don't even bother to manufacture consent. They kidnapped Maduro and killed a bunch of people doing that, too.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just don't get it.
If I was Iran:
Allowing the US to blockade you, well within striking range, doesn't make any sense.
There's gotta be something I'm missing.
Solarwinds-123@reddit
What you're missing is that this is the reality of geopolitics. How things appear is often more important than how they are.
Right now, sentiment in the US is unenthusiastic about this whole situation. Iran striking some US radar dishes and Gulf oil facilities isn't going to change that.
Bomb a US Navy ship, though, and that's a totally different story. The US has a long history of getting very upset when other countries (except one) touch our boats. The last thing Iran wants is to swing public sentiment in favor of a full invasion.
CyberClawX@reddit
Directly attacking the USA, might force USA to retaliate, or even give them the excuse to use even more force.
USA right now is risking only a small part of their navy. Iran, risks a very prolonged war, with heavy civilian/military losses. Which is why Iran is trying to be diplomatic, with a country that broke negotiations without warning, and shows no qualms about bombing literally school children.
greyetch@reddit
Yeah that just seems insane to me. The US assassinates your head of state and religious leader, bombs a school, and now you expect them to negotiate with you??? In what world can you believe the US regime's words?
Revlar@reddit
It wouldn't be by international law, but it would be spun as an escalation by US politicians and the media to justify extreme measures by the US in turn
Naurgul@reddit (OP)
I simply don't think the ability to sink the ships whenever Iran pleases is there. The ships have lots of systems to defend themselves. They're not civilian ships.
greyetch@reddit
What defense do they have against hypersonic missiles? Or even just regular old artillery? If they do genuinely have a way to deflect these things, then that makes sense. My understanding is that deflecting such a projectile is essentially impossible, meaning Iran could sink them at will.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond!
Advanced-Net-8119@reddit
As for the hypersonic missles, the US Navy Aegis system is capable of shooting down hypersonic missles. Regular old artillery would never be able to threaten the US navy, it has neither the range or the fire control systems required. As for drones, navy ships are equipped with SEWIP Block 3 to jam them, Phalanx CIWS to shoot them down, and ODIN laser system. Different ships have different setups, but all have at least some capability against them.
Naurgul@reddit (OP)
I'm not really an expert so I can't really answer with any degree of certainty. My understanding is American ships can use anti-air fire to intercept or fully avoid Iranian drones/missiles as long as they have enough warning time. This warning time gets shorter the closer they get to Iranian shores but they don't need to be very close to enforce the blockade.
SenoraRaton@reddit
You don't wanna give the US casus belli.
Remember what happened to Japan after Pearl Habor? Iran remembers.
greyetch@reddit
That's different, though. The Japanese attacked the US in Hawaii. The American people whole heartedly supported a war.
The US attached Iran, in Iran. Then we sent ships into Iran to blockade Iran. If Iran sinks those ships, that is self defense.
The American people are already very against this war. I don't think that this would change that. Americans understand "trespassers will be shot" quite well.
ScaryShadowx@reddit
I don't think the whole 'US attacked first' really matters. An attack on a US ship that is enforcing a blockade would be seen as a rallying cry in the US and be painted as an attack on a peaceful vessel engaging in legal policing actions by the US. Americans would be outraged at the idea of hundreds of dead US troops, regardless of what they were doing.
Iran has been relatively smart about escalating. The US blockade is another loss for the US in terms of international standing. Iran is opening up the strait to allow international trade and the US is the one blocking it now making it harder for countries, further confirming to the world they need to divest from the US. Sure it will damage Iran's economy, but when you are in an existential war, economy is secondary to survival.
greyetch@reddit
Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I think only boomers who are addicted to Fox will believe that nonsense.
imunfair@reddit
Iran did attack US military vessels in the gulf yesterday in response to their ship being seized - not sure which ones or if they were successful though, it was just a passing mention in the BBC live blog.
knuppi@reddit
BBC is also on the side of Usrael
Ambiwlans@reddit
US military ships are mostly far away and a very hard target. They have softer targets to aim at if they feel pressured.
greyetch@reddit
I'm talking about the ships that are literally in the Strait of Hormuz. They are well within Iranian range for a plethora of weapons.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
Iran has no ability to sink any US naval ships
Future-Excuse6167@reddit
Yes, assuming the the United States doesn't bomb the reserve tanks.
I found these jeans on the floor. I'm not sure the last time they went in the wash, but I don't smell any funk, so I think I'm good to go.
ma33a@reddit
And Iran will retaliate by hitting all the GCC storage tanks it can reach. Which will cripple the Middle East and have wide ranging knock on effects around the world.
giboauja@reddit
This would be like Ukraine just bombing Belarus everytime Russia bombed them. For some reason people think that's ok and it annoys me. I'm certainly against this war, but the GCC countries really had reason to be afraid of Iran considering they can only be Irans punching bags in the case of a regional war.
Like jesus, bomb Israel or ships in the sea... (not really we all need to hope these idiots find some path to peace. )
aykcak@reddit
Which will happen because the only two powers who give zero fucks about oil prices are the Iran government and Trump by himself
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
interesting to see when a country commits war crimes, and face no repercussions, but now the other country can do those same war crimes, so now their "even". Lucky all the gulf nations, there to let Iran even the score.
and the rest of the world gets screwed in the process.
ycnz@reddit
How many of the Gulf nations aren't hosting US military bases?
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
lucky them
Future-Excuse6167@reddit
A war crime is something so horrible you're willing to agree to not do it to your enemy in exchange for them agreeing to not do it to you.
The stakes in war are high; you can't afford to play by a more restrictive set of rules than your opponent.
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
"A war crime is something so horrible you're willing to agree to not do it to your enemy in exchange for them agreeing to not do it to you."
Not the legal definition of a War crime though, as if it was, it would allow stronger enemies to do as they will, without fear of the other side doing it back.
Where in theory, they would have international sanctions for breaking those rules.
Like training dogs to rape people...
Future-Excuse6167@reddit
Umm... so, like, this is a bit awkward for me because we are on a sub for international news, but this exactly what the world has been doing since the end of WW2.
Stronger enemies with a votes (or friends with votes) on the UN Security Council commit war crimes with impunity.
The only guaranty against war crimes being done to you is to be able to do them back.
And even Iran is not in this situation as it can't hit the US mainland (and might not want to given how unpolular the war already is), but it can at least hit some allies of the US.
anomalous_cowherd@reddit
So the USA shedding allies rapidly is actually a tactic to reduce reachable targets? Sneaky! I thought it was just incompetence and belligerence.
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
yeah so hence the in theory bit, but the international law is there, its just being ignored. it doesnt then change the definition of a war crime, or crime agaisnt humanity just because crazy people are happy to do it.
Future-Excuse6167@reddit
Nothing crazy about defending yourself and your family and your country against an unprovoked act of illegal aggression.
Obtusus@reddit
America REALLY doesn't like when you remove their puppets from power (see Cuba)
Paradoxjjw@reddit
Like the US and Israel have been doing for decades now.
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
yes, i was pointing out the other dude's definition of a war crime was terrible lol.
PerforatedPie@reddit
Who does that?
travistravis@reddit
Israel
BatHickey@reddit
Limited guesses, there was an article about it last week if I recall.
agentchuck@reddit
This war is pretty asymmetrical in terms of stakes.
Future-Excuse6167@reddit
Yeah, I realized after writing that Iran isn't really in a position to bomb mainland US infrastructure, so it's not an equal position... but it can reply to escalation with like-for-like attacks in the GCC or Israel at least, which is more than we could say for most of the other victims of US Empire.
sluttytinkerbells@reddit
Is destroyinng oil Infrastructure a war crime?
Rulweylan@reddit
Arguably. You could reasonably make the case that oil infrastructure contributes to Iran's capacity to fight the war significantly enough to be considered a viable military target, but the proposition is dicey.
Czart@reddit
Which geneva convention would striking oil reserves even violate?
BendicantMias@reddit
Do that and Iran bombs Saudi Arabia's pipeline as well as blocks the Bab Al Mandeb Strait. Even more oil off the market yay.
Firecracker048@reddit
Iran already struck the pipeline though. So that's out the window.
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/09/iran-war-oil-saudi-arabia-east-west-pipeline.html
BendicantMias@reddit
Is it still piping oil? If so, it's still very much a target.
Firecracker048@reddit
If oil in Saudi is a target, oil in Iran is as well.
BendicantMias@reddit
Lol! Bruh keep up. I replied to the guy suggesting Iranian oil would ALREADY be targeted. This is a response to that.
Escalate further, and desalination will be targeted next.
Geez the lengths you cowards will go to avoid putting your own necks on the line. You'd rather see the entire ME blown up than put your boots on the ground. That's how chicken you're looking right now. Bush was also a warmonger, but at least he wasn't a chicken. Meanwhile Trump literally has a widespread nickname calling him just that. 🐔🐔🐔🐔
So pathetic that the supposed strongest military in the world is terrified on conducting an invasion lmao!
Firecracker048@reddit
Brother Iran oil infra first in this war, March 2nd. Theirs got struck on March 8th.
I do admire your ability to not let facts get in the way of your opinions
manhattanabe@reddit
What does this mean ? Maybe Iran can keep producing and storing oil, but that doesn’t make them any money. How long can Iran go on without income ? Also, much of those sales will be lost as China’s will purchase alternative oil. This means the missing income will not be recovered later.
ChaosDancer@reddit
The people that are left running the show, and mean running the show in a figurative way, don't really care about the economy of Iran, they care how much they can hurt you.
I honestly don't get people i really don't. The world have been calling Iran an oppressive theocracy since the revolution, their pope has been martyred and the expectation is "Yes they really should behave logical and care about the future"
Like wtf guys.
BendicantMias@reddit
Never heard of the 'rally around the flag effect'? People don't like being turned into puppets by foreigners. They were called on to rise up last year as well, and again didn't. Iranians literally rose up TO remove a puppet in the form of the Shah, and you think they'll rise up to instate a new one? They've already seen this nonsense from the West before, they're not keen to repeat it.
They do care about the future. THEIR future, not yours. They'll rise up on their own terms, not on your terms.
Ambiwlans@reddit
You misread. They are saying it is silly Americans think this would end well.
knuppi@reddit
Americans are quite silly
BendicantMias@reddit
Ironically, thanks to your sanctions, Iran isn't as completely dependent on oil for its economy as, say, Saudi Arabia is.
And China isn't gonna buy alternative oil at inflated prices when it can just return to Iranian oil. They're not desperate, they can wait this out for longer than anyone not in the Americas - https://youtu.be/K3I95C60YaU?si=qpbeKFuJaDZwxXhD
Firecracker048@reddit
Iran is very heavily reliant on oil exports for its economy. Not as heavily as Saudi, sure, but very heavy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/16/business/economy/iran-oil-blockade.html#:~:text=Reliable%20figures%20about%20Iran's%20trade,total%20export%20revenue%20in%202023.
China can wait, but Iran sure can't.
tommytwolegs@reddit
The rest of the world can wait just as little. If this goes into summer the spike in oil prices and resulting recession will cripple the entire world
RedTulkas@reddit
philippines and Co can wait even less
Firecracker048@reddit
70% of Irans government revenue is oil exports. That's pretty dependent
-HOSPIK-@reddit
It's because when storage is full they have to shut down the oilwells, shutting down oil wells means they have to drill new ones because stopped oil wells go bad and stop producing oil.
Valokoura@reddit
Other countries will be eager to buy oil since national reserves are used as we speak. Countries want to fill those again in case of something unexpected happens - like US moves on the dance floor.
HockeyHocki@reddit
Exports is only half the picture though, Iranian refineries can't meet the domestic demand for fuel, gasoline etc. Even running flat out Iran need to import fuel by sea, failing that people will not be able to fill up at the pumps and the country really does shut down
AutoModerator@reddit
The link you have provided contains keywords for topics associated with an active conflict, and has automatically been flaired accordingly. If the flair was not updated, the link submitter MUST do so. Due to submissions regarding active conflicts generating more contrasting discussion, comments will only be available to users who have set a subreddit user flair, and must strictly comply with subreddit rules. Posters who change the assigned post flair without permission will be temporarily banned. Commenters who violate Reddiquette and civility rules will be summarily banned.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.