Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,
The Middle East conflict has disrupted more than 1 billion barrels of oil supply, but China's massive strategic crude stockpile helped offset the shock by sharply reducing imports, preventing oil prices from surging even higher.
Countries are now racing to build or replenish strategic petroleum reserves, with the IEA planning to refill the 400 million barrels it released during the crisis and major importers like India looking to expand their emergency stockpiles.
This wave of reserve rebuilding could create a major new source of oil demand, supporting crude prices once the Middle East crisis fully subsides as governments prioritize energy security alongside the energy transition.
The war in the Middle East has cost the world over a billion barrels in cumulative supply losses. Yet luckily, China had built a reserve of about the same size before the closure of Hormuz, so it stopped buying so much oil, arresting the inevitable price jump. Now, everyone wants to build an oil reserve—or needs to replenish the ones they already have.
Back in March, soon after the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran began, prompting the latter to retaliate by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the International Energy Agency said it would release 400 million barrels of crude from its joint emergency reserve. The reserve was set up, along with the IEA, as a response to the Arab oil embargo and other supply disruptions from the 70s, when the world was even more dependent on Middle Eastern crude than it is today.
The release announced in March worried oil market observers because it was set to be the largest ever made, much larger than what the IEA member states released in 2022 when Western sanctions on Russia following its incursion into Ukraine prompted a price spike. Back then, the IEA only released 182 million barrels. Now, member states stood ready to release 400 million barrels, plus millions of barrels from the U.S. strategic petroleum reserve.
All these millions of barrels would need to be replenished once the crisis is over, or even before it is over if it drags on. Analysts have been warning about it and about the potential of this replenishment drive to lift international prices, which have remained stubbornly depressed, even amid fresh reports of new strikes between Iran and the United States. Yet on top of the replenishment drive, there are nations seeking to build their own strategic reserves to insulate themselves from future shocks.
Reuters noted in a recent report that nations that had limited oil reserves at home had felt the pain from the closure of Hormuz more sharply than those with ample reserves. Such a conclusion is, of course, a no-brainer, but it is indicative of something besides the obvious, namely, that crude oil remains the ultimate fuel of the global economy, regardless of the acceleration of transition efforts in the past decade.
Multiple reports following the outbreak of war in the Middle East said it would prompt energy importers to switch to things like wind and solar in order to reduce their dependence on those imports of crude from the Middle East. Indeed, many governments across Asia—the most vulnerable region—did double and triple down on wind and solar, but at the same time signaled they are aware these cannot replace hydrocarbons to any meaningful degree. So they also started thinking about building an oil reserve. China was the inspiration.
There seems to be a pretty comprehensive agreement among energy analysts that China played an instrumental role in keeping the world from drowning in three-digit oil prices. It did this thanks to its tendency to plan well ahead and prepare for adverse events, such as a war in the Middle East. China had been buying oil on the cheap from Iran, Russia, and Venezuela for years, building the most massive oil reserve in the world. Funnily enough, reports about the gap between Chinese crude imports and refinery run rates served to keep a lid on prices, keeping oil cheaper for longer, helping China build its reserve. And when the war came, China slashed imports and dug into its oil inventories.
Following China’s example may be quite a challenge, though it seems simple on the face of it. The challenge, of course, is financial. India, for instance, wants to boost its own oil reserve, which is currently unacceptably low, covering just eight days of imports. The government has already instructed state major ONGC to add 13 million barrels to its crude reserve, but those 13 million barrels will not go a long way in case of shortages—and buying enough oil to help in case of shortages would cost tens of billions of dollars. India, by the way, is not the only large oil importer thinking of boosting its oil reserves. And China will need to refill its reserve, as will IEA members.
What this means is that demand for crude oil is about to rise the moment there is an indication that the crisis in the Middle East is over, for real this time. Even the International Energy Agency—of peak oil demand fame—said in its latest monthly oil report that it expected global oil demand to rebound to 2 million barrels daily in 2027, after dipping by 1.1 million barrels daily this year due to the crisis and its effect on supply and prices. In good news for buyers, the news of stronger demand would probably push oil prices lower.
Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 18:25Authored by Kay Rubacek via The Epoch Times,
Eric Schmidt hadn't finished the word "artificial" before the booing started.
A child uses a laptop in a file photo. Alain Jocard/AFP/Getty ImagesThe former Google CEO stood at the University of Arizona's commencement last month, ready to deliver the kind of speech he had probably given a dozen times before: AI as the next great transformation, graduates as its rightful authors.
He got as far as telling them the technology would "touch every profession, every classroom, every hospital, every laboratory, every person, and every relationship you have." The boos rose before he could finish his own sentence. "I can hear you," he said gently. The boos continued, as did Schmidt, who was unable to fully conceal the awkward embarrassment.
He wasn't the only one. A week earlier, at Middle Tennessee State University, Big Machine Records CEO Scott Borchetta told graduates that "AI is rewriting production as we sit here." The boos from graduates started immediately. He responded with tough love: "I know it. Deal with it." But the boos only grew louder.
A week before that, real estate executive Gloria Caulfield barely got through the phrase "next industrial revolution" at the University of Central Florida before the crowd erupted. "Okay, I struck a chord," she said, turning around with her hands up in disbelief and clearly caught off guard.
They were all caught off guard. This isn't how graduations usually go.
Older generations had their own frustrations with the people steering their world, but they rarely stood up at their own commencement, in front of their families, and told a stranger they didn't believe them or what they had to say about their future.
It would be easy to read the response as simple nerves about a tough job market and leave it there. But when you look more closely at how this generation actually lives with technology, their worldview takes a different form.
A recent Gallup survey found that Gen Z's use of AI has leveled off, but their feelings about it have not. Excitement has fallen 14 points in a year, to just 22 percent. And anger has climbed 9 points, to 31 percent. Even among those who use it every day, enthusiasm dropped by 18 points over 12 months. Eight in ten now believe AI will make learning harder. Forty-two percent believe it will hurt their ability to think carefully. Only a quarter believe it will help. Nearly half say the risks of AI in the workplace now outweigh the benefits, which is a sharp rise from the year before. And when asked whose work they actually trust, 69 percent said human work. Only 3 percent said AI's work alone.
A separate Gallup study found that 47 percent of college students have seriously considered changing their major because of what AI is doing to the job market. Sixteen percent have already changed. The students who use AI most, such as in technology, business, and engineering, are also the ones most likely to be reconsidering whether they picked the right field at all.
The kids know the use of artificial intelligence is built into every device they touch throughout their day. It is being wired to replace the skills they were once told to seek in every career they had been advised to pursue.
They know it is being promised to make their lives "better" and "easier," while they feel it is chipping away at their cognitive abilities and sense of challenge and fulfillment, and the adults in the room - or those being offered as role models on commencement stages - are wondering why youth aren't as excited about AI as they expected.
And we should have seen this coming. According to researchers, Gen Z is the first generation in modern memory to test less cognitively capable than their own parents did at the same age, despite having more schooling and more access to information than any generation in human history.
In January, neuroscientist Jared Cooney Horvath told the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee that attention, memory, literacy, numeracy, reasoning, general IQ - key cognitive performance indicators among young people - have stalled or reversed across much of the developed world over the past two decades. He points to classroom screens and education technology as the cause, arguing the brain was never built to learn the way these tools teach. More tools. More data. Less mind.
For nearly two centuries, every generation had tested smarter than the one before it. Researchers called it the Flynn effect, and it held through wars, depressions, and the collapse of empires. It was a 200-year winning streak. Horvath told lawmakers the streak is over.
The graduates booing those speakers are not confused about this. They are living it. They are the data.
A year ago, I wrote about a different version of this same generational response. Vinyl records were outselling CDs, mostly bought by people under 35. Journaling by hand, crochet, taking silent walks, and a trend called "Posting Zero," in which young people stepped back from performing their lives online. That calm rebellion looked like withdrawal, but it has given way to something louder and bolder. It is a signal that we older folk need to pay attention to.
Older generations tend to see AI the way we see most new technology: as a tool that does or doesn't work, that we adopt or resist on our own terms, in our own time. Younger generations don't have that luxury of distance, and there is a fury at being told how to feel about it by people who built it, sold it, or profited from it first without understanding the consequences of using their youth as part of a larger experiment.
This next generation may not hit all the test scores that their forbears did, but they still have human wisdom intact. Children don't get a vote on the experiments run on their own development, and yet these graduates found a way to cast their vote loudly. Either way, I hope their votes will be counted.
Kay Rubacek is an award-winning educator, filmmaker, author, and mother. Detained in a Chinese prison in 2001 for her human-rights advocacy, she has since dedicated her work to exposing the systems and ideologies that diminish human life and human sovereignty. She has been a contributor to The Epoch Times since 2010.
Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 17:40