this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
184 points (99.5% liked)

World News

51797 readers
2727 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just in case there was any doubt about what this war was about.

I'll note that Chevron's refineries in California have exactly the right equipment to process Venezuelan crude (it's heavy) and have been under threat of shutting down due to depletion of oil fields in California.

This post uses a gift link with a view count limit. When it runs out, there is an archived copy of the article

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 41 points 5 days ago

So, when we gonna look at Congressional stock records and see who bought Chevron shortly before this went down?

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 35 points 5 days ago (2 children)

We have less than 50 years of proven oil reserves left, and we're doing everything we can to ensure that we run out at least that fast, while also ensuring that we pass critical climate tipping points.

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 35 points 5 days ago

Shareholders need value now, not in 50 years.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 17 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

50 years of proven oil reserves

I heard that same number ~20 years ago and got a little curious now: it seems that we are still discovering (and "proving") new oil reserves and unfortunately humanity won't run out of oil anytime soon, esp. considering that the incentive for unlocking new reserves rises with oil prices.

It's sad but also eye-opening wrt this US regime's actions.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

we are still discovering (and "proving") new oil reserves

That's true, but each new oil discovery is likely to be more expensive to extract than the last, and because it takes energy to extract oil, we have to consider the energy return on investment (EROI) of all future oil extraction. Once we get to the point where it requires a barrel of oil equivalent of energy to extract a barrel of oil out of the ground, the EROI drops to 1:1 and there's no profit to be made, from an energy standpoint, regardless of price. Oil discovery in the US has decreased from an EROI of 1000:1 in 1919 to about 5:1 in the 2010s.

No matter how you look at it, the world has just got to stop using oil wherever physically possible.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I fully expect oil companies to convince governments to tax their citizens 150% to subsidize their new oil wells, just so they can continue looking for and opening new ones LONG after it ceases to be profitable.

It's like conservatives and democracy. They're okay with it as long as they can keep "winning" but when they can't win anymore, they won't change their behavior, they'll stop using democracy.

I'd argue we already passed that point for both conservatives (in most major countries) AND oil company profits.

The cost of dealing with fossil fuels has been far outweighing the cost of using them, and has been for many many decades. If our species makes it that long, our grandchildren's grandchildren's great great great grandchildren will still be dealing with our mistakes.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 18 points 5 days ago

As if it wasn't obvious, but still important to see it black on white.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Damn, I sure hope nobody does any bombings or other acts of sabotage that would be considered terrorism against those refineries. That would be awful.

[–] FatCrab@slrpnk.net 5 points 5 days ago

Chevron can just throw meat and money (probably subsidized direct by the Trump admin) at a refinery as long as they need. Otoh, corporate offices are located in CA and TX apparently.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Just in case there was any confusion on what one of the primary goals here was

[–] ngdev@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 days ago

trump literally said that in his news conference, there shouldnt be any confusion

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Vultures go after animals that are already dead. This would be like the vultures pointing the eagles (heh) to sickly targets.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 days ago

That's what I mean, Chevron are the vultures in this case. They didn't chop the head off, but they're here for the blood...