Oil

U.S. crude oil futures for May plummet to minus $37 β€” lowest price in history

U.S. crude oil futures for May plummet to minus $37 β€” lowest price in history

U.S. crude oil prices dropped by almost 300 percent to turn negative for the first time as plunging demand pushed storage facilities to their limits.

May delivery for the U.S. benchmark crude, West Texas Intermediate, sank to a new low of minus $37.63 a barrel by the close of the oil market Monday, a staggering level that essentially means producers would be paying buyers to take oil off their hands.

Coronavirus Live Updates : NPR

U.S. Crude Oil Prices Go Negative As Demand Disappears : Coronavirus Live Updates : NPR

The dramatic collapse in worldwide demand for oil led to an extraordinary development on Monday: U.S. oil prices fell below zero for the first time ever, and kept falling.

The key U.S. oil benchmark, West Texas Intermediate, settled at negative $37.63.

Driven by a trading contract deadline, traders desperately looked for buyers for the barrels of oil they normally hold in their books. But buyers were hard to find — even when the oil was being given away for free.

Coronavirus Live Updates : NPR

U.S. Oil Drops Below $2 Per Barrel As Demand Disappears : Coronavirus Live Updates : NPR

A key American oil benchmark, West Texas Intermediate, fell by more than 80% on Monday as global oil markets continue to grapple with a pandemic-driven collapse in demand.

At the start of 2020, a barrel of WTI cost around $60.

Shortly after 1:40 p.m. ET on Monday, a barrel was trading for less than $2 — the lowest price the WTI futures market has ever seen.

Oil industry ‘not asking’ for bailout from Trump, trade group chief says

Oil industry ‘not asking’ for bailout from Trump, trade group chief says

The leader of the largest U.S. oil and gas trade group said the industry is not interested in receiving aid from the Trump administration to help overcome a historic drop in oil prices on Monday.

“We are not in discussions with anyone in the administration at this time on any type of program for the industry,” said Mike Sommers, the CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, in response to a question from the Washington Examiner on a press call. “We believe we shouldn’t be reacting to one day of a market downturn.”

Sommers added he has spoken to a number of API members and that the consensus is, "They are not asking for anything from the government.”

Oil and Gas Firms Reward Politicians When They Vote Against the Environment, Finds New Study | DeSmog

Oil and Gas Firms Reward Politicians When They Vote Against the Environment, Finds New Study | DeSmog

“For every additional 10 percent of congressional votes against the environment in 2014, a legislator would receive an additional $5,400 in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies in 2016,” the study finds. On average, researchers found a 10 percent decrease in pro-environment votes is associated with an additional $1,700 in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies in the following election cycle. The evidence supports what the researchers call the “investment hypothesis”: “The more a given member of Congress votes against environmental policies, the more contributions they receive from oil and gas companies supporting their reelection.”

And these companies are investing millions of dollars to reelect lawmakers who support their anti-environment agenda. The researchers note that oil and gas companies spent more than $84 million on congressional candidates in 2018, and this year they have already contributed more than $40 million, with the overwhelming majority going to Republican candidates.

“The oil and gas industry is going to support candidates supportive of their agenda, which often runs contrary to the environmental agenda,” said Tyson Slocum, energy program director at consumer advocacy nonprofit Public Citizen. He said the study shows how the industry “seeks to financially reward opponents of action on climate change” and acts as a roadblock to legislative and regulatory climate action.

“In a system where candidates are extraordinarily dependent on private corporate contributions, donations by oil and gas companies is going to play a big role in stopping action on climate,” Slocum said.

“These findings are troubling, considering that Congressional candidates are much more likely to win if they raise more money than their opponents,” Goldberg added.

Grassroots actions are already working to counter this political paralysis on climate action powered by oil and gas money. Goldberg noted that more Americans are engaging in climate activism and increasingly view global warming as a voting issue. The youth-led Sunrise Movement is building a broad coalition to help elect candidates not beholden to fossil fuel interests, organizing around the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge. Candidates who take that pledge say they will refuse contributions over $200 from fossil fuel PACs, lobbyists, or executives.

According to Slocum, these efforts are encouraging, given the undeniable role of oil and gas campaign spending on legislators favorable to their interests.

“It gives great legitimacy to broad efforts for candidates to reject fossil fuel money,” he said.

Main image: Former U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis, left, and Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe April 26, 2018. Sen. Inhofe has received more than $2 million in donations from the oil and gas industry. Credit: U.S. Department of Defense/Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Dominique A. Pineiro, public domain Get DeSmog News and Alerts Tags: oil company campaign contributions campaign finance

Dana Drugmand's blog

Share Tweet Reddit Share Share PRINT SUBSCRIBE ‹ PREVIOUS Momentum Builds to Monitor Cancer Alley Air Pollution in Real Time After Exxon Refinery Fire in Louisiana NEXT › Jordan Cove Backers Double Down on Efforts to Push Project Following Federal Permit Delay