Archive for Energy

The missing link in America’s critical minerals push isn’t mining – it’s processing expertise

By Hélène Nguemgaing, University of Maryland and Alan Collins, West Virginia UniversityThe United States is spending billions of dollars to secure access to critical minerals – minerals and metals that are essential to modern technology, from electric vehicles to smartphones and military systems.

But amid the push to dig more, one question gets far too little attention: Who will actually process what comes out of the ground?

Between mining and the finished product lies a complex chain of separation, refining and advanced manufacturing. Since the 1990s, however, the United States has lost much of its critical mineral processing capacity.

Rebuilding domestic mineral supply chains will depend not only on resource availability and funding, but also on whether the U.S. can rebuild the technical expertise and industrial systems required to process those materials on a large scale.

MP Materials’ Mountain Pass mine and processing facility in California was for years the only U.S. rare earth elements mine.
Tmy350/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

How America lost its lead

The United States was a global leader in rare earth minerals from 1965 through the mid-1980s. It produced about 15,000 metric tons a year, about three times the amount produced by the rest of the world.

The Mountain Pass mine in California supplied the majority of the world’s rare earth elements used in electronics and the defense industry. American metallurgists, chemical engineers and processing facilities had significant expertise in its production and processing.

However, environmental damage, including wastewater pipeline leaks that released radioactive wastewater into the Mojave Desert during the 1980s and 1990s, and tightening regulations increased operating costs in the United States. During that period, much of the world’s manufacturing base for rare earth elements shifted to China, where labor costs were lower and environmental regulations were less stringent.

As production grew abroad, U.S. production of rare earth elements fell sharply – to near zero by the early 2000s, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

In recent years, as much as 90% of the rare earth minerals extracted in the United States and allied countries have been shipped to China for processing. In 2024, the U.S. relied on imports for about 80% of its rare earth compounds and metals.

Why bringing processing back is not simple

The U.S. government is now pushing to increase domestic critical minerals production, citing national security. But building a processing facility is not like opening a warehouse.

These facilities require years of permitting, highly specialized equipment and a workforce trained in metallurgy, chemical engineering and industrial systems operation. The time from investment decision to production can stretch across a decade.

The U.S. currently has two domestic rare earth mining locations. One is in southeast Georgia, which extracts rare earth elements as a byproduct of heavy mineral sand mining. The other is Mountain Pass, which produces bastnaesite, a rare earth carbonate mineral. The mines produced about 51,000 metric tons of rare earth mineral concentrates in 2025, while the U.S. imported about 21,000 metric tons of rare earth compounds, most of them from China, according to 2025 U.S. Geological Survey data.

The U.S. has also lost expertise. Mining and mineral engineering education programs now produce only a few hundred graduates per year, well below the levels of past decades. The number of accredited programs has declined since the 1980s. Many faculty members are nearing retirement.

Industry projections estimate that the mining workforce will need to grow significantly in the coming years to meet rising demand. Specialized skills in areas such as rare earth separation, metallurgical testing and environmental systems design require years of training and practical experience. And while mining can produce high-paying jobs, the industry also has a reputation for environmental damage and hazardous conditions.

Environmental compliance is part of the skill set

Processing critical minerals is a dirty industry. That fact has made it more difficult for processing and refining companies to operate in the U.S.

For example, separating rare earth elements typically involves chemical processing with acids and solvents. When waste streams are poorly managed, these processes can produce toxic wastewater and air pollution and contribute to soil erosion. In parts of China where rare earth production expanded rapidly in the 1990s and 2000s, contamination from mining and processing has polluted rivers and damaged nearby farmland, and the wastewater can seep into soil and groundwater.

In the U.S., modern facilities must meet strict federal and state standards for air quality, water discharge and waste management that raise the cost of processing. These regulations were developed in response to environmental disasters, like the Cuyahoga River fire of 1969, when industrial oil and waste on the river burned, and hazardous waste crises like the Love Canal disaster that led to landmark environmental laws.

Operating a refinery or separation facility in compliance with regulatory standards today requires expertise in pollution control, waste treatment and sustainable process design. That requires a workforce skilled in materials science and engineering and with knowledge of environmental systems. Without environmental expertise, operational risks, regulatory challenges and project delays can increase, affecting long-term viability.

How to build a US supply chain

Rebuilding U.S. supply chains will require more than expanding extraction.

Canada’s critical minerals strategy offers an example. It connects mining projects to battery and electric vehicle manufacturing by funding processing facilities, developing regional supply chain hubs and investing in workforce training programs tied to those industries.

Australia has combined critical minerals policies with incentives and public financing to encourage domestic mineral processing, while also expanding university and vocational training in mining, metallurgy and mineral processing.

The United States has many of the key ingredients needed to rebuild its processing capacity, including research universities and workers with transferable industrial skills. Land-grant and technical universities could expand programs that integrate mining, materials science, environmental restoration and recycling. In regions such as Appalachia, where coal’s decline has left workers with skills but few job opportunities, retraining programs for new mineral recovery jobs could help people transition to a new industry.

A few federal programs support parts of this transition, including research hubs that develop new extraction and processing technologies, apprenticeship initiatives and university-industry partnerships. However, these efforts are spread across multiple agencies, with limited coordination to align priorities and investment.

The real bottleneck

America’s critical minerals strategy is often discussed in terms of geology and geopolitics – where resources are located and who has access to them.

But supply chains depend on people and systems. That’s America’s real bottleneck in creating a domestic supply chain.

A successful domestic supply chain will require workers who know how to separate neodymium from praseodymium, operate solvent extraction circuits and maintain hydrometallurgical plants within regulatory standards. These are highly specialized skills that take years to develop.

The United States has significant mineral resources and growing policy support. Now, it needs to pay attention to the workforce and industrial capacity needed to transform those resources into usable materials.

This gap developed over decades. Addressing it will likely require sustained investment alongside broader mineral policy changes such as permitting reforms and investment in domestic processing facilities.The Conversation

About the Author:

Hélène Nguemgaing, Assistant Clinical Professor of Critical Resources & Sustainability Analytics, University of Maryland and Alan Collins, Professor of Natural Resource Economics, West Virginia University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

COT Energy Charts: Speculators push Brent Crude Oil Bearish Bets to lowest since October

By InvestMacro

Speculators OI Energy Futures COT Chart
Here are the latest charts and statistics for the Commitment of Traders (COT) data published by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

The latest COT data is updated through Tuesday May 5th and shows a quick view of how large traders (for-profit speculators and commercial entities) were positioned in the futures markets.

Weekly Speculator Changes led by Brent Oil & Gasoline

Speculators Nets Energy Futures COT Chart
The COT energy market speculator bets were mixed this week as three out of the six energy markets we cover had higher positioning while the other three markets had lower speculator contracts.

Leading the gains for the energy markets was Brent Oil (16,333 contracts) with Gasoline (2,677 contracts) and Heating Oil (2,022 contracts) also having positive weeks.

The markets with declines in speculator bets for the week were WTI Crude (-13,125 contracts), Bloomberg Index (-1,552 contracts) and Natural Gas (-373 contracts) also seeing lower bets on the week.

Brent Crude Oil Bearish Bets drop to lowest since October

Highlighting Energy futures markets this week is Brent Crude Oil. This market saw a jump by over 16,000 speculative net contracts this week and this market has seen gains in seven out of the past 10 weeks. The Brent Crude Oil futures market traditionally has a negative net large speculator standing due to a lot of hedging activity. This week, however, the market is close to an almost neutral overall position with a total of -9,224 net contracts. This is the least bearish level for Brent Crude Oil since October 2025. Typically, when bets have fallen this low, the oil price is also low. The last two times the net position has been this low, the Brent Crude Oil price has been trading around $60 per barrel. But due to the Iran war, the oil price is currently over $100 per barrel with perhaps more risk to the upside at the moment.

Energy market prices were down across the board this week.

In the Energy markets, In the Energy markets price performances, we saw lower markets all across the board for the week. Heating Oil dipped by -1.43%, followed by the Bloomberg Commodity Index, which fell by -1.63%.

Gasoline was lower by over 2% this week with a -2.02% decline. Natural Gas was also lower by -2.68%. Brent Oil fell by -6.58%, while WTI Crude Oil was the biggest negative returner on the week with a -7.32% decrease.


Energy Data:

Speculators Table Energy Futures COT Chart
Legend: Weekly Speculators Change | Speculators Current Net Position | Speculators Strength Score compared to last 3-Years (0-100 range)


Strength Scores led by Brent Oil & Gasoline

Speculators Strength Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Scores (a normalized measure of Speculator positions over a 3-Year range, from 0 to 100 where above 80 is Extreme-Bullish and below 20 is Extreme-Bearish) showed that Brent Oil (68.0 percent) and Gasoline (52.2 percent) lead the energy markets this week.

On the downside, the Bloomberg Index (0.0 percent) comes in at the lowest strength level currently and is in Extreme-Bearish territory (below 20 percent). The next lowest strength score was Natural Gas (25.5 percent).

Strength Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (44.8 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (49.0 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (68.0 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (44.7 percent)
Natural Gas (25.5 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (25.8 percent)
Gasoline (52.2 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (49.2 percent)
Heating Oil (50.9 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (48.3 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (0.0 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (1.6 percent)

 


Brent Oil & Natural Gas top the 6-Week Strength Trends

Speculators Trend Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Score Trends (or move index, calculates the 6-week changes in strength scores) showed that Brent Oil (11.9 percent) and Natural Gas (3.8 percent) lead the past six weeks trends for the energy markets.

The Bloomberg Index (-64.9 percent) leads the downside trend scores currently with WTI Crude Oil (-17.7 percent) as the next market with lower trend scores.

Move Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (-17.7 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (-8.6 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (11.9 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (-4.3 percent)
Natural Gas (3.8 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (7.5 percent)
Gasoline (-12.1 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (-22.5 percent)
Heating Oil (-5.1 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (-15.5 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (-64.9 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (-62.5 percent)


Individual COT Market Charts:

WTI Crude Oil Futures Futures:

WTI Crude Oil Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • WTI Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week resulted in a net position of 178,786 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position fall of -13,125 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 191,911 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 44.8 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish with a score of 53.8 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 55.0 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

WTI Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:18.545.13.8
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:9.855.12.5
– Net Position:178,786-206,15027,364
– Gross Longs:381,542933,44279,154
– Gross Shorts:202,7561,139,59251,790
– Long to Short Ratio:1.9 to 10.8 to 11.5 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):44.853.855.0
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBullishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-17.718.6-11.9

 


Brent Crude Oil Futures Futures:

Brent Last Day Crude Oil Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Brent Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week resulted in a net position of -9,224 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position advance of 16,333 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -25,557 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 68.0 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 28.6 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 81.6 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Brent Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:30.932.04.1
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:34.929.32.8
– Net Position:-9,2246,2033,021
– Gross Longs:71,48574,0799,396
– Gross Shorts:80,70967,8766,375
– Long to Short Ratio:0.9 to 11.1 to 11.5 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):68.028.681.6
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish-Extreme
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:11.9-14.111.3

 


Natural Gas Futures Futures:

Natural Gas Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Natural Gas Futures large speculator standing this week resulted in a net position of -166,646 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position lowering of -373 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -166,273 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 25.5 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish with a score of 79.3 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bearish with a score of 37.2 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Downtrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Downtrend.

Natural Gas Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:14.635.53.4
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:24.826.12.6
– Net Position:-166,646153,15013,496
– Gross Longs:237,674578,70855,616
– Gross Shorts:404,320425,55842,120
– Long to Short Ratio:0.6 to 11.4 to 11.3 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):25.579.337.2
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBullishBearish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:3.80.3-16.1

 


Gasoline Blendstock Futures Futures:

RBOB Gasoline Energy Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Gasoline Blendstock Futures large speculator standing this week resulted in a net position of 58,893 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position lift of 2,677 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 56,216 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 52.2 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 38.5 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 83.6 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Nasdaq Mini Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:26.747.88.4
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:7.871.43.8
– Net Position:58,893-73,38214,489
– Gross Longs:83,248149,32926,330
– Gross Shorts:24,355222,71111,841
– Long to Short Ratio:3.4 to 10.7 to 12.2 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):52.238.583.6
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish-Extreme
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-12.110.14.2

 


#2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures Futures:

NY Harbor Heating Oil Energy Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • #2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures large speculator standing this week resulted in a net position of 5,689 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position lift of 2,022 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 3,667 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 50.9 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 38.4 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 83.3 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Heating Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:17.447.819.0
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:15.059.99.2
– Net Position:5,689-29,53723,848
– Gross Longs:42,178115,95646,091
– Gross Shorts:36,489145,49322,243
– Long to Short Ratio:1.2 to 10.8 to 12.1 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):50.938.483.3
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish-Extreme
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-5.10.110.4

 


Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures Futures:

Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures large speculator standing this week resulted in a net position of -76,636 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position lowering of -1,552 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -75,084 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish-Extreme with a score of 0.0 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 100.0 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 63.1 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Bloomberg Index Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:44.754.50.2
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:75.424.00.0
– Net Position:-76,63676,162474
– Gross Longs:111,634136,162527
– Gross Shorts:188,27060,00053
– Long to Short Ratio:0.6 to 12.3 to 19.9 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):0.0100.063.1
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):Bearish-ExtremeBullish-ExtremeBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-64.964.91.8

 


Article By InvestMacroReceive our weekly COT Newsletter

*COT Report: The COT data, released weekly to the public each Friday, is updated through the most recent Tuesday (data is 3 days old) and shows a quick view of how large speculators or non-commercials (for-profit traders) were positioned in the futures markets.

The CFTC categorizes trader positions according to commercial hedgers (traders who use futures contracts for hedging as part of the business), non-commercials (large traders who speculate to realize trading profits) and nonreportable traders (usually small traders/speculators) as well as their open interest (contracts open in the market at time of reporting). See CFTC criteria here.

UAE’s OPEC exit has been long in the works – and may mark the beginning of a Gulf realignment

By Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, Rice University 

The United Arab Emirates’ decision to withdraw from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries will leave the oil cartel weakened at a crucial time. It also illustrates the ongoing tensions between the UAE and Saudi Arabia, OPEC’s largest producer and de facto leader.

The UAE announced on April 28, 2026, that it will depart OPEC and OPEC+, an expanded grouping which includes Russia, on May 1, depriving the groups of their third- and fourth-largest oil producer, respectively.

Though the move may seem abrupt, as a close observer of the UAE and intra-Gulf politics, I believe Abu Dhabi’s decision to leave OPEC and go it alone was in the cards for a while and follows years of Abu Dhabi’s complaints about the cartel.

The announcement also follows years of divergence between Emirati and Saudi oil policies, as well as the growth of competitive rivalries between the two countries over wider regional questions. This rift between the two largest Sunni Gulf states burst into the open in December 2025, when competing visions for security in Yemen threatened to reignite civil conflict in the war-torn country.

Unity in the face of Iranian attacks since then should not mask that underlying split, of which the UAE’s OPEC decision is merely the latest manifestation.

The world’s most prominent cartel

OPEC formed in 1960 as a way for the main oil producers to set production limits and therefore control the price of crude around the world.

The UAE has been a member of OPEC since the seven-emirate federation was established in 1971, although Abu Dhabi – the emirate that holds 95% of Emirati oil reserves – has been a member since 1967.

At its height in the mid- and late-1970s, OPEC played a powerful role in reshaping the balance of power between oil producers and consumers, and countering Western dominance in a postcolonial setting of resource nationalization.

While other members have withdrawn from OPEC in recent years – such as Qatar in 2019 and Angola in 2024 – the impact of the UAE’s departure is on a far greater scale, affecting about 12% of OPEC’s total oil output.

Furthermore, the exit of the UAE removes one of the few major swing producers from OPEC, weakening the organization’s ability to respond rapidly to changing market conditions in the future.

Diverging Gulf priorities

The UAE has been signaling a potential split for at least five years, when differences of opinion with Saudi Arabia on how to manage oil policy emerged ahead of a November 2020 OPEC+ summit. The rift became openly visible during a subsequent meeting of OPEC+ countries in July 2021.

In both cases, the UAE wished to increase oil production – which had been sharply curtailed by OPEC members during the COVID-19 pandemic – while the Saudis sought to maintain high prices by keeping output lower and prices higher.

In part, this reflects the different circumstances of the two Gulf nations. The Saudis are reliant on higher oil prices to drive the revenues needed to fund its lavish budget and pay for massive infrastructure projects like its Vision 2030 project. The Emirati economy, on the other hand, is more diversified and less directly dependent on oil revenues.

Instead, Abu Dhabi has invested heavily in recent years to expand capacity to be able to increase oil production from 3.4 million barrels a day before the U.S.-Israel war against Iran to 5 million barrels a day by 2027 – and potentially higher later on. This reflects a desire to monetize its reserves and move the oil to market to avoid the risk of stranded assets should global demand fall in any future transition away from fossil fuels.

Shorn of the constraints of OPEC quotas, which the Emiratis have chafed against for years, officials in Abu Dhabi will be able to increase production should it wish to do so once the impasse with Iran is broken and the Strait of Hormuz fully reopens.

Post-Iran war regional shifts

It is clear that UAE leadership is first and foremost intent on doubling down on the pursuit of its national interests, with an emphasis on prioritizing ties with the U.S. – and likely also Israel – over those with countries that Abu Dhabi feels reflect an old world it is now seeking to leave behind.

While the war in Iran may have temporarily overshadowed the eruption of Saudi-Emirati tensions over Yemen and visions for the region, the rift had not been resolved prior to the U.S. and Israeli launch of military operations on Feb. 28.

Comments by prominent Emiratis have suggested that officials in the UAE have paid close attention to which countries have, in their view, stepped up to assist the UAE in times of crisis, and which have not.

The OPEC decision thus reflects a calculation in Abu Dhabi that there is no longer any utility in remaining part of a Saudi-dominated organization. The UAE’s reconsideration of other memberships, such as the Arab League, Organization of Islamic Conference or even the Gulf Cooperation Council, may be next, as the UAE and other regional countries begin to think ahead to an uncertain post-war landscape.The Conversation

About the Author:

Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, Fellow for the Middle East at the Baker Institute, Rice University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

What’s in the price of a gallon of gas?

By Robert I. Harris, Georgia Institute of Technology 

The U.S. Energy Information Administration expects nationwide retail gasoline prices to average near US$4.30 a gallon for April 2026 – the highest monthly average of the year. The political response has been familiar. Georgia has suspended its state gas tax, other states are weighing their own tax holidays, and the White House has issued a temporary waiver of a law known as the Jones Act in hopes of moving more domestic fuel to East Coast ports.

As an energy economist, I am often asked about what contributes to gas prices and what different policies can do to affect them.

The price of a retail gallon of gas is the sum of four things: the cost of crude oil, refining, distribution and marketing, and taxes.

In nationwide figures from January 2026, crude oil accounted for about 51% of the pump price, refining roughly 20%, distribution and marketing about 11% and taxes about 18%. That mix shifts with conditions: When crude oil prices spike, that can drive more than 60% of the price; when the price drops, taxes and logistics are larger shares of the cost.

Crude oil is the biggest ingredient

Because the price of crude oil is the largest element, most of the price at the pump is derived from the global oil market.

Usually, big swings in crude prices come mainly from shifts in global demand and expectations – not from supply disruptions, according to widely cited research in 2009 by the economist Lutz Kilian.

But what is happening in early 2026 with the war in Iran is one of the exceptions: a classic supply shock. Severe disruptions to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and attacks on Middle East oil infrastructure have taken millions of barrels a day off the global market.

Most drivers generally can’t quickly reduce how much they drive or how much gas they use when prices rise, so gasoline demand doesn’t change much in the short run. That means a jump in crude costs tends to result in people paying more rather than driving less.

Refining, regulations and the California puzzle

Refining turns crude into gasoline at industrial scale. The U.S. doesn’t have a single gasoline market, though. Roughly a quarter of U.S. gasoline is a cleaner-burning blend of petroleum-derived chemicals called “reformulated gasoline,” which is required in urban areas across 17 states and the District of Columbia to reduce smog.

California uses an even stricter formulation that few out-of-state refineries make. California is also geographically isolated: No pipelines bring gasoline in from other U.S. refining regions.

California’s gasoline prices have long run above the national average, explained in part by higher state taxes and stricter environmental rules. But since a refinery fire in Torrance, California, in 2015 reduced production capacity, the state’s prices have been about 20 to 30 cents a gallon higher than what those factors would indicate.

Energy economist and University of California, Berkeley, professor Severin Borenstein has called this the “mystery gasoline surcharge” and attributes it to the fact that there isn’t as much competition between refineries or gas stations in California as in other states. California’s own Division of Petroleum Market Oversight says the surcharge cost the state’s drivers about $59 billion from 2015 to 2024. It’s not exactly clear who is getting that money, but it could be gas stations themselves or refineries, through complex contracts with gas stations.

Getting the gas into your car

The distribution and marketing category covers the costs of everything involved in getting the gasoline from the refinery gate to your tank.

Gasoline moves by pipeline, ship, rail and truck to wholesale terminals, and then by local delivery truck to service stations.

At the retailer’s end, the key factors are station rent and labor, the cost to buy gasoline in bulk to be able to sell it, credit card fees of as much as 6 to 10 cents a gallon at current prices, and franchise fees paid to the national brand, such as Sunoco or ExxonMobil, for permission to put their branding on the gas station.

Most gas station operators net only a few cents per gallon on fuel itself – which is why many gas stations are really convenience stores with pumps out front. Borenstein and some of his collaborators have also documented that retail gas prices rise quickly when wholesale costs climb but fall slowly when wholesale costs drop.

The question of gas tax holidays

The federal government charges a tax on fuel, of 18.4 cents a gallon for gasoline and 24.3 cents a gallon for diesel. States charge their own taxes, ranging from 70.9 cents a gallon for gas in California to 8.95 cents in Alaska.

When gas prices rise, many politicians start talking about temporarily suspending their state’s gas tax. That does reduce prices, but not as much as politicians – or consumers – might hope. Research on past gas tax holidays has found that consumers get about 79% of the reduction in gas taxes. That means oil companies and fuel retailers keep about one-fifth of the tax cut for themselves rather than passing that savings to the public.

Gas tax holidays also reduce funding for what the taxes are designed to pay for, typically roads and bridges. That pushes road and bridge upkeep costs onto future drivers and general taxpayers.

There is an additional problem, too: Taxes on gasoline are supposed to charge drivers for some of the costs their driving imposes on everyone else – carbon emissions, local air pollution, congestion and crashes. But Borenstein has found that U.S. fuel tax levels are already far below the true cost to society. Removing the tax on drivers effectively raises the costs for everyone else.

The Jones Act: A small number that adds up

The 1920 Jones Act is a federal law that requires cargo moving between U.S. ports to travel on vessels built and registered in the U.S., owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed primarily by U.S. citizens and permanent residents. Of the world’s 7,500 oil tankers, only 54 meet this requirement. Only 43 of these can transport refined fuels such as gasoline.

So, despite significant refining capacity on the Gulf Coast, some U.S. gasoline is exported overseas even as the Northeast imports fuel, in part reflecting the relatively high cost of moving fuel between U.S. ports.

Economists Ryan Kellogg and Rich Sweeney estimate that the law raises East Coast gasoline prices by about a penny and a half per gallon on average, costing drivers roughly $770 million a year. In light of the war’s effect on gas prices, the Trump administration has temporarily suspended the Jones Act requirements – an action more commonly taken when hurricanes knock out Gulf Coast refineries and pipeline networks.

What moves the number

The result of all these factors is that the price that drivers see at the pump mostly reflects the global price of crude, plus a stack of domestic costs, only some of which are inefficient.

Tax holidays give a partial, short-lived rebate. Jones Act waivers trim pennies, though permanent repeal may cause more fundamental changes, such as reduced rail and truck transport of all goods, which could lower costs, emissions and infrastructure damage associated with cargo transportation. Harmonizing fuel blends across states and seasons may lower prices somewhat, but likely at the expense of increased emissions.

Ultimately, the best protection against oil price shocks is a more efficient gas-burning vehicle, or one that doesn’t burn gasoline at all. In the meantime, the best I can offer as an economist is clarity about what that $4.30 actually buys.The Conversation

About the Author:

Robert I. Harris, Assistant Professor of Economics, Georgia Institute of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

COT Energy Charts: Weekly Speculator Bets led by Natural Gas

By InvestMacro


Here are the latest charts and statistics for the Commitment of Traders (COT) data published by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

The latest COT data is updated through Tuesday April 21st and shows a quick view of how large traders (for-profit speculators and commercial entities) were positioned in the futures markets.

Weekly Speculator Bets led by Natural Gas

Speculators Nets Energy Futures COT Chart
The COT energy market speculator bets were mixed this week as three out of the six energy markets we cover had higher positioning while the other three markets had lower speculator contracts.

Leading the gains for the energy markets was Natural Gas (18,573 contracts) with Gasoline (3,350 contracts) and Brent Oil (322 contracts) also having positive weeks.

The markets with declines in speculator bets for the week were WTI Crude (-14,239 contracts), Heating Oil (-2,152 contracts) and Bloomberg Index (-35 contracts) also seeing lower bets on the week.

Gasoline and Brent Oil lead Energy market price performance.

Energy Markets were mostly higher across the board this week with Gasoline being the leader in price performance with a 13.42% gain on the week. Brent Oil came in next with an 11.40% upswing, while Heating Oil saw a strong weekly gain of 8.87%. WTI Crude Oil was also higher and rose by 8.79% for the week while the Bloomberg Commodity Index advanced by 4.03% over the past 5 days.

On the downside, Natural Gas was the only market to see a negative price performance on the week with a modest -0.96% decline.


Energy Data:

Speculators Table Energy Futures COT Chart
Legend: Weekly Speculators Change | Speculators Current Net Position | Speculators Strength Score compared to last 3-Years (0-100 range)


Strength Scores led by Heating Oil & Gasoline

Speculators Strength Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Scores (a normalized measure of Speculator positions over a 3-Year range, from 0 to 100 where above 80 is Extreme-Bullish and below 20 is Extreme-Bearish) showed that Heating Oil (50.6 percent) and Gasoline (50.2 percent) lead the energy markets this week. WTI Crude Oil (49.2 percent) and Brent Crude Oil (47.9 percent) come in as the next highest in the weekly strength scores.

On the downside, the Bloomberg Index (0.5 percent) comes in at the lowest strength level currently and is in Extreme-Bearish territory (below 20 percent). The next lowest strength score was Natural Gas (24.5 percent).

Strength Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (49.2 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (53.7 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (47.9 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (47.4 percent)
Natural Gas (24.5 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (12.5 percent)
Gasoline (50.2 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (46.5 percent)
Heating Oil (50.6 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (53.5 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (0.5 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (0.6 percent)

 


Natural Gas top the 6-Week Strength Trends

Speculators Trend Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Score Trends (or move index, calculates the 6-week changes in strength scores) showed that Natural Gas (11.9 percent) leads the past six weeks trends for the energy markets.

Bloomberg Index (-62.7 percent) leads the downside trend scores currently with Gasoline (-17.5 percent) as the next market with lower trend scores.

Move Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (-11.5 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (11.1 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (-14.5 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (5.4 percent)
Natural Gas (11.9 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (12.5 percent)
Gasoline (-17.5 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (-42.0 percent)
Heating Oil (-10.0 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (-13.2 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (-62.7 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (-61.6 percent)


Individual COT Market Charts:

WTI Crude Oil Futures Futures:

WTI Crude Oil Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • WTI Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of 192,302 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position decrease of -14,239 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 206,541 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 49.2 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 47.5 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 68.9 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

WTI Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:19.144.03.8
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:9.555.42.1
– Net Position:192,302-226,71134,409
– Gross Longs:380,020873,31676,070
– Gross Shorts:187,7181,100,02741,661
– Long to Short Ratio:2.0 to 10.8 to 11.8 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):49.247.568.9
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBearishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-11.515.2-27.7

 


Brent Crude Oil Futures Futures:

Brent Last Day Crude Oil Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Brent Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of -23,334 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position boost of 322 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -23,656 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 47.9 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish with a score of 51.2 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 69.2 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Brent Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:24.736.54.2
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:33.828.33.3
– Net Position:-23,33420,9502,384
– Gross Longs:63,01893,28610,766
– Gross Shorts:86,35272,3368,382
– Long to Short Ratio:0.7 to 11.3 to 11.3 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):47.951.269.2
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBullishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-14.514.59.2

 


Natural Gas Futures Futures:

Natural Gas Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Natural Gas Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of -168,315 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position increase of 18,573 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -186,888 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 24.5 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish with a score of 77.4 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bearish with a score of 48.6 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Downtrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Downtrend.

Natural Gas Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:15.435.33.7
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:26.025.82.5
– Net Position:-168,315150,31617,999
– Gross Longs:242,027556,42658,043
– Gross Shorts:410,342406,11040,044
– Long to Short Ratio:0.6 to 11.4 to 11.4 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):24.577.448.6
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBullishBearish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:11.9-9.2-11.8

 


Gasoline Blendstock Futures Futures:

RBOB Gasoline Energy Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Gasoline Blendstock Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of 57,115 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position increase of 3,350 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 53,765 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 50.2 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 40.3 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 83.4 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Strong Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Strong Uptrend.

Nasdaq Mini Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:24.150.68.4
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:6.872.34.0
– Net Position:57,115-71,57214,457
– Gross Longs:79,546167,08127,799
– Gross Shorts:22,431238,65313,342
– Long to Short Ratio:3.5 to 10.7 to 12.1 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):50.240.383.4
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish-Extreme
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-17.517.5-7.3

 


#2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures Futures:

NY Harbor Heating Oil Energy Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • #2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of 5,454 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position lowering of -2,152 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 7,606 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 50.6 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 39.8 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 80.0 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Heating Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:15.049.018.7
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:12.860.49.6
– Net Position:5,454-28,10022,646
– Gross Longs:37,085121,17546,321
– Gross Shorts:31,631149,27523,675
– Long to Short Ratio:1.2 to 10.8 to 12.0 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):50.639.880.0
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish-Extreme
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-10.08.5-3.6

 


Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures Futures:

Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of -74,831 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position reduction of -35 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -74,796 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish-Extreme with a score of 0.5 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 99.6 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 63.7 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Bloomberg Index Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:44.554.70.2
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:75.024.40.0
– Net Position:-74,83174,349482
– Gross Longs:109,438134,349521
– Gross Shorts:184,26960,00039
– Long to Short Ratio:0.6 to 12.2 to 113.4 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):0.599.663.7
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):Bearish-ExtremeBullish-ExtremeBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-62.762.7-1.0

 


Article By InvestMacroReceive our weekly COT Newsletter

*COT Report: The COT data, released weekly to the public each Friday, is updated through the most recent Tuesday (data is 3 days old) and shows a quick view of how large speculators or non-commercials (for-profit traders) were positioned in the futures markets.

The CFTC categorizes trader positions according to commercial hedgers (traders who use futures contracts for hedging as part of the business), non-commercials (large traders who speculate to realize trading profits) and nonreportable traders (usually small traders/speculators) as well as their open interest (contracts open in the market at time of reporting). See CFTC criteria here.

Data centers don’t have to be a burden on local communities – and can even support them by generating power and repurposing waste heat

By Gregor Henze, University of Colorado Boulder and Sean Shaheen, University of Colorado Boulder 

Many consumers – and state policymakers and even utility companies – are worried about the possibility of large numbers of data centers raising electricity demand and power prices.

Those are real concerns, but our engineering research finds that if designed, constructed and operated carefully, data centers can actually help the communities that host them.

On-site energy storage

Locating power-generating capacity on-site, even using modified jet engines to drive steam turbines, is one emerging option to address data centers’ high power needs.

But there are other options, too. Data centers can install backup batteries that would kick in during an outage or could be used to avoid an outage when demand spikes. The batteries could not only provide power to the data center but also to the surrounding area in times of need.

Various types of battery designs and chemistries offer options for storing enough energy to keep a data center running from a few hours to a few days. This would be critical in supplying electricity during outages because of extreme weather events or excess demand on the grid during periods of peak usage.

Longer duration batteries are also in development. Plans for a new Google data center in Minnesota include solar panels and wind turbines with batteries that would become the world’s largest electricity storage system, with a power capacity of 300 megawatts. Google plans to install iron-air batteries, which are based on chemical reactions with iron to separate and store charge, that would store enough electrical energy to keep a data center running for as much as 100 hours.

Another long-duration battery design uses zinc and water as its key chemical ingredients. It needs relatively little cooling, so batteries can be stacked closely. Significant storage capacity could allow data center owners to flexibly decide when to use energy directly from the grid, when to run off the batteries, when to recharge the batteries, and even whether to sell power back to the grid to earn extra money.

Using waste heat in the community

Data centers produce large amounts of heat, which must be removed from the computer chips. A data center gives off enough heat to potentially keep nearby buildings warm.

Many cities around the world already have what are called “district heating systems,” in which a group of buildings are connected with a pipe network and receive their heat from a central heat source.

Data centers could serve as a heat source for these systems. Recent improvements in these systems, called a “thermal microgrid” or an “ambient loop,” don’t require steam or extremely hot water, but rather use cooler temperatures of water to transport heat between the buildings. Efficient electric heat pumps in each building use that water loop to adjust the building’s air temperature in both winter and summer, creating combined district heating and cooling systems.

In this scenario, data center heat becomes not wasted energy rejected into the air but a money- and energy-saving resource for the local community. For example, a 75 megawatt data center in the town of Mantsala, Finland, is supplying heat to approximately 2,500 homes in the community.

Combining energy production, storage and heating

In our research, we suggest that combining data centers equipped with on-site power generation and battery energy storage and systems that use the waste heat could make the data center a benefit to the community rather than a drain on its resources.

Locating a data center with on-site battery energy storage in a neighborhood and, crucially, connecting them both thermally and electrically could create a small-scale energy community. In addition to providing heat, the data center could help meet the neighborhood’s electricity needs during power outages, storms or peak usage periods.

A diagram shows connections between a data center and its nearby community buildings.
Combined thermal and electrical microgrids form an integrated energy community with data center waste heat reuse.
Gregor Henze and Sean Shaheen, CC BY-NC-ND

Improved efficiency of computing

As a fourth dimension to achieving sustainability in data centers, an emerging approach involves drastically reducing the energy consumed for every unit of computation. That would mean exponential growth in computational tasks does not require a corresponding exponential growth in hardware or electricity usage.

Advances in computer chip designs are making data center processors significantly more efficient, able to do larger numbers of more complex calculations more quickly while using less electricity.

But however efficient the chips get, there is both need and opportunity to make them dramatically more so. A growing field called “unconventional computing” is poised to help.

This field, which includes computing approaches inspired by the architecture of the human brain in the emerging technology of neuromorphic AI, as well as engineering innovations such as chips that use their own waste heat, can exhibit thousands-, millions-, or even billionsfold increases in power efficiency. That could make data centers immensely more capable of the computing tasks needed for training AI systems.

Improvements in data center efficiency would reduce the demand for more computing chips and more electricity to run them, even while producing more output.

Researchers across academia, industry and government agencies are developing road maps to scaling these new pathways for energy-efficient computing and are planning for a future where new materials with fundamentally different properties improve efficiency even more.

Some of these advances may be months away, though others could be decades into the future. But we believe that taken together, the opportunities for power generation and storage, waste heat reuse and improved computational efficiency could make data centers beneficial for their communities, and society as a whole, in support of energy affordability and resilience.The Conversation

About the Author:

Gregor Henze, Professor of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder and Sean Shaheen, Professor of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

COT Energy Charts: Weekly Speculator Bets led by Brent Oil

By InvestMacro 

Speculators OI Energy Futures COT Chart

Open Interest (OI) is the amount of contracts that are currently live in the marketplace. OI Strength shows the current strength compared to the past 3-years.

Here are the latest charts and statistics for the Commitment of Traders (COT) data published by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

The latest COT data is updated through Tuesday April 7th and shows a quick view of how large traders (for-profit speculators and commercial entities) were positioned in the futures markets.

Weekly Speculator Changes led by Brent Oil

Speculators Nets Energy Futures COT Chart
The COT energy market speculator bets were overall lower this week as just one out of the six energy markets we cover had higher positioning while the other five markets had lower speculator contracts.

Leading the gains for the energy markets was Brent Oil with a gain of 4,691 contracts.

The markets with declines in speculator bets for the week were the Bloomberg Index (-98,639 contracts), Natural Gas (-16,531 contracts), WTI Crude (-11,335 contracts), Gasoline (-8,734 contracts) and Heating Oil (-1,205 contracts) also seeing lower bets on the week.

Brent Crude and Bloomberg Commodity Index highlight weekly changes

Highlighting the Energy market changes this week was Brent Oil, which was the only market with a positive week in speculator bets. Brent Oil saw a sharp drop by over -18,000 contracts last week (March 31st) and rebounded by almost +5,000 contracts this week. Overall, the Brent Crude Oil speculator position remains in negative territory as this market is usually negative and incorporates a lot of hedging activity.

Next up, the Bloomberg Commodity Index positions dropped by the most on record, falling by almost -100,000 contracts this week after seeing an influx of positions by over +35,000 contracts last week (March 31st). The Bloomberg Commodity Index bets fell by -98,639 contracts this week, bringing the overall net position standing to -75,342 contracts. This means the Bloomberg Commodity Index is now at the lowest or most bearish level on record dating back to 2016, according to CFTC data.

Energy Markets Price Performance was lower across the board on the Iran war ceasefire.

In the energy markets, Gasoline fell the least this week with a -3.47% decline, followed by the Bloomberg Commodity Index, which retreated by -4.46%. Natural Gas was down by over 6% with a drop by -6.13%.

The biggest losers on the week and most significantly affected by the Iran war ceasefire, were Brent Oil which fell by -13.91%, WTI Crude Oil, which dropped by -14.09%, and Heating Oil, which decreased strongly by -16.45% over the past five days.


Energy Data:

Speculators Table Energy Futures COT Chart
Legend: Weekly Speculators Change | Speculators Current Net Position | Speculators Strength Score compared to last 3-Years (0-100 range)


Strength Scores led by Heating Oil

Speculators Strength Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Scores (a normalized measure of Speculator positions over a 3-Year range, from 0 to 100 where above 80 is Extreme-Bullish and below 20 is Extreme-Bearish) showed that Heating Oil (55.2 percent), Gasoline (53.0 percent) and WTI Crude Oil (52.3 percent) lead the energy markets this week.

On the downside, the Bloomberg Index (0.0 percent) and Natural Gas (14.4 percent) come in at the lowest strength level currently and is in Extreme-Bearish territory (below 20 percent).

Strength Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (52.3 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (56.0 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (36.8 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (30.1 percent)
Natural Gas (14.4 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (25.0 percent)
Gasoline (53.0 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (62.6 percent)
Heating Oil (55.2 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (56.7 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (0.0 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (100.0 percent)

 


Brent Oil & WTI Crude top the 6-Week Strength Trends

Speculators Trend Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Score Trends (or move index, calculates the 6-week changes in strength scores) showed that Brent Oil (26.2 percent) and WTI Crude (9.5 percent) lead the past six weeks trends for the energy markets.  is the next highest positive mover in the latest trends data.

The Bloomberg Index (-63.8 percent) and Gasoline (-43.2 percent) lead the downside trend scores currently with Heating Oil (-10.5 percent) as the next market with lower trend scores.

Move Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (9.5 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (23.3 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (26.2 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (0.6 percent)
Natural Gas (9.3 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (11.8 percent)
Gasoline (-43.2 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (-22.5 percent)
Heating Oil (-10.5 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (-7.0 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (-63.8 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (34.7 percent)


Individual COT Market Charts:

WTI Crude Oil Futures Futures:

WTI Crude Oil Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • WTI Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week reached a net position of 202,153 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position reduction of -11,335 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 213,488 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 52.3 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 46.3 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 56.8 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

WTI Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:18.743.44.0
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:8.854.72.6
– Net Position:202,153-230,46628,313
– Gross Longs:381,615883,57681,673
– Gross Shorts:179,4621,114,04253,360
– Long to Short Ratio:2.1 to 10.8 to 11.5 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):52.346.356.8
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:9.5-4.2-31.1

 


Brent Crude Oil Futures Futures:

Brent Last Day Crude Oil Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Brent Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week reached a net position of -31,124 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position advance of 4,691 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -35,815 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 36.8 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish with a score of 61.2 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 86.1 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Brent Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:25.540.54.6
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:37.330.13.2
– Net Position:-31,12427,4163,708
– Gross Longs:67,615107,13812,052
– Gross Shorts:98,73979,7228,344
– Long to Short Ratio:0.7 to 11.3 to 11.4 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):36.861.286.1
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBullishBullish-Extreme
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:26.2-32.737.7

 


Natural Gas Futures Futures:

Natural Gas Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Natural Gas Futures large speculator standing this week reached a net position of -183,987 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position fall of -16,531 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -167,456 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish-Extreme with a score of 14.4 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 85.2 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 58.5 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Downtrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Downtrend.

Natural Gas Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:13.736.73.6
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:25.526.32.2
– Net Position:-183,987162,08721,900
– Gross Longs:212,869572,12356,582
– Gross Shorts:396,856410,03634,682
– Long to Short Ratio:0.5 to 11.4 to 11.6 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):14.485.258.5
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):Bearish-ExtremeBullish-ExtremeBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:9.3-14.016.6

 


Gasoline Blendstock Futures Futures:

RBOB Gasoline Energy Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Gasoline Blendstock Futures large speculator standing this week reached a net position of 59,592 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position decline of -8,734 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 68,326 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 53.0 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 37.8 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 83.3 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Nasdaq Mini Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:25.049.59.6
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:6.472.65.1
– Net Position:59,592-74,02014,428
– Gross Longs:80,253158,73630,682
– Gross Shorts:20,661232,75616,254
– Long to Short Ratio:3.9 to 10.7 to 11.9 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):53.037.883.3
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish-Extreme
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-43.237.29.5

 


#2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures Futures:

NY Harbor Heating Oil Energy Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • #2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures large speculator standing this week reached a net position of 8,887 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position decline of -1,205 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 10,092 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 55.2 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bearish with a score of 37.8 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 76.5 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Heating Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:15.249.718.8
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:11.462.99.4
– Net Position:8,887-30,23121,344
– Gross Longs:34,892113,69642,973
– Gross Shorts:26,005143,92721,629
– Long to Short Ratio:1.3 to 10.8 to 12.0 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):55.237.876.5
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-10.59.1-4.4

 


Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures Futures:

Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures COT ChartPositioning Notes:

  • Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures large speculator standing this week reached a net position of -75,342 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday.
  • Weekly Speculator position decrease of -98,639 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 23,297 net contracts.
  • This week’s current strength score (range over the past 3 years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish-Extreme with a score of 0.0 percent.
  • The Commercials are Bullish-Extreme with a score of 100.0 percent.
  • The Small Traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 74.5 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Uptrend.

Bloomberg Index Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:42.356.90.3
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:74.125.30.0
– Net Position:-75,34274,711631
– Gross Longs:100,140134,711657
– Gross Shorts:175,48260,00026
– Long to Short Ratio:0.6 to 12.2 to 125.3 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):0.0100.074.5
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):Bearish-ExtremeBullish-ExtremeBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-63.864.0-9.7

 


Article By InvestMacroReceive our weekly COT Reports by Email

*COT Report: The COT data, released weekly to the public each Friday, is updated through the most recent Tuesday (data is 3 days old) and shows a quick view of how large speculators or non-commercials (for-profit traders) were positioned in the futures markets.

The CFTC categorizes trader positions according to commercial hedgers (traders who use futures contracts for hedging as part of the business), non-commercials (large traders who speculate to realize trading profits) and nonreportable traders (usually small traders/speculators) as well as their open interest (contracts open in the market at time of reporting).See CFTC criteria here.

All information and opinions on this website and contained in this article are for general informational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice.

Why the Persian Gulf has more oil and gas than anywhere else on Earth

By Scott L. Montgomery, University of Washington It has been said that Persian Gulf countries are both blessed and cursed by their vast oil and gas reserves. Geologic forces over millions of years have meant the region is an energy-rich global flash point, as it is now with a war underway that’s causing a global energy crisis.

As a petroleum geologist who has studied the region, I still find myself amazed at the size of its hydrocarbon endowment. For instance, there are more than 30 supergiant fields, each holding 5 billion barrels or more of oil, around the Persian Gulf. And wells in the region produce two to five times more oil each day than even the best wells in the North Sea and Russia.

Modern geoscience has identified several key factors of rocks that make a region particularly rich in petroleum, including their ability to generate and hold hydrocarbons. In the Persian Gulf region, all of these factors are at or near optimal levels.

For sheer abundance and ease of production, it simply doesn’t get any better than the Persian Gulf region.

A map of the Persian Gulf region shows locations of oil and gas fields.
The Persian Gulf region is rich in oil fields, marked in green, and gas fields, marked in red.
Central Intelligence Agency via Library of Congress

A quick history

Humans knew about the presence of hydrocarbons in the area long before flooding created the Persian Gulf at the end of the last ice age, between 14,000 and 6,000 years ago. Natural seeps of oil and gas are common along rivers and valleys in many parts of the region. Thousands of years before the start of the Common Era people used bitumen, a form of heavy oil, for building mortar and to waterproof boats.

The first modern oil discovery came in 1908 at a known seepage site in western Iran. In the 1950s and ’60s, an era of rapid expansion in oil and gas exploration, it became clear that no other region on Earth was likely to have a similar abundance.

Other areas with huge volumes of oil and gas have been found, such as West Siberia in Russia and, more recently, the Permian Basin in the U.S., but none compare either with the scale of reserves or the high rates at which oil and gas can be produced in the Persian Gulf.

Geologic setting

The Persian Gulf region is located where two continental plates are colliding: the Arabian Plate to the southwest and the Eurasian Plate to the east and north. This collision has been happening for about 35 million years and has resulted in a dynamic setting where rock layers have been bent and broken and, at deeper levels, transformed by significant heat and pressure.

Geologic features differ a great deal between the two sides of the Gulf. On the Iranian side, the the Zagros Mountains stretch 1,100 miles (1,800 kilometers) from the Gulf of Oman to the Turkish border. Part of the great Alpine-Himalayan mountain system, the Zagros are made up of highly folded and broken rocks that formed over the past 60 million years from the collisions of Africa, Arabia and India with Eurasia.

On the Arabian side of the Gulf, that type of bending and fracturing didn’t occur. Instead, the compressive forces of collision warped a rigid platform of deep, hard rock known as “basement rock” into broad, dome-like structures of enormous size, extending for tens, even hundreds, of square miles.

Underlying the Persian Gulf itself is a basin filled with debris eroded from the rising of the Zagros Mountains. In its deeper portions, the basin was subjected to high temperatures and pressures necessary for the generation of oil and gas.

Overall, it is an excellent setting for generating and trapping hydrocarbons on a large scale.

An overhead view of a folded and rumpled landscape.
A satellite view of an area of the southwestern Zagros Mountains shows long ridges and valleys, evidence of tectonic plates colliding.
NASA via Flickr

Rocks that make oil

Oil and gas form from organic material such as marine zooplankton and phytoplankton, originally concentrated in shales, mud-rich limestones and other rocks exposed to elevated temperatures and pressures. When rocks are composed of at least 2% organic material, they are considered to be high quality for oil and gas generation.

The Gulf region has a particularly large number of layers of such source rocks, some of which are especially thick, widespread and organically rich. Examples are the Hanifa and Tuwaiq mountain formations on the Arabian side of the Gulf, which formed during the Jurassic period, about 200 million to 145 million years ago, and the Kazhdumi formation in Iran, which formed in the Cretaceous period, about 145 to 66 million years ago. These rocks have between 1% and 13% organic content, and even more in some places.

Oil and gas structures

The region’s bent and fractured rock layers, and its domes, are well suited for trapping hydrocarbons.

Folds of the Zagros, which are legendary for geologists due to their spectacular forms on satellite imagery, contain hundreds of billions of barrels of oil and cubic meters of natural gas. A glance at a map of oil and gas in the Persian Gulf region will show a northwest-southeast trend of long, sausage-shaped fields reflective of major fold structures. These features actually include hundreds of individual fields of varied size, reaching from southern Iran through northeastern Iraq.

On the Arabian Plate, the large dome structures have formed especially large oil and gas accumulations. These include Ghawar oil field in Saudi Arabia, the largest in the world, which could produce over 70 billion barrels of crude oil. The South Pars-North Dome gas field, shared by Qatar and Iran, could produce at least 1,300 trillion cubic feet (46 billion cubic meters) of gas – equivalent in energy content to more than 200 billion barrels of oil.

The most important reservoir rocks are limestones in which portions have been partly dissolved, enhancing the ability for oil and gas to move through them. In Zagros reservoirs, fluid flows through fractures created by the folding and faulting related to plate collisions. And in places such as the Arab-D reservoir at the Ghawar Field in Saudi Arabia and the Asmari limestone in many Zagros fields, these high-quality oil-storage rocks cover huge areas – hundreds and even thousands of square kilometers.

Nothing on this scale exists anywhere else on the planet, onshore or offshore, testifying to the unique petroleum geology of the Persian Gulf region.

Future possibilities

The combined result of these factors is that roughly half of the world’s conventional oil reserves and 40% of its gas lie beneath just 3% of the Earth’s land surface.

U.S. Geological Survey assessments suggest that, even after more than a century of drilling and production, large amounts of oil and gas remain to be discovered in the Persian Gulf region. In a 2012 report covering the Arabian Peninsula and Zagros Mountains, the agency estimated there could be as much as 86 billion barrels of oil and 336 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the rocks, in addition to the amounts that have already been discovered.

More oil and gas could also be produced using the horizontal drilling and fracking techniques pioneered in the U.S. in the 2000s and 2010s. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are now trying those methods in their petroleum fields. It’s too early to say how successful they may be, but research indicates they could allow even more production.The Conversation

About the Author:

Scott L. Montgomery, Lecturer in International Studies, University of Washington

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

COT Energy Charts: Bloomberg Commodity Index Speculator Bets Surge Higher

By InvestMacro 

Speculators OI Energy Futures COT Chart
Here are the latest charts and statistics for the Commitment of Traders (COT) data published by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

The latest COT data is updated through Tuesday March 31st and shows a quick view of how large traders (for-profit speculators and commercial entities) were positioned in the futures markets.

Weekly Speculator Changes led by the Bloomberg Commodity Index

Speculators Nets Energy Futures COT Chart
The COT energy market speculator bets were mixed this week as three out of the six energy markets we cover had higher positioning while the other three markets had lower speculator contracts.

Leading the gains for the energy markets was the Bloomberg Commodity Index (35,029 contracts) with Natural Gas (5,151 contracts) and Heating Oil (525 contracts) also having positive weeks.

The markets with declines in speculator bets for the week were WTI Crude (-20,132 contracts), Brent Oil (-18,260 contracts) and with Gasoline (-1,520 contracts) also recording lower bets on the week.

Bloomberg Commodity Index Speculator Bets Surge Higher

Highlighting the Energy Speculative Positioning this week was the strong gains in the Bloomberg Commodity Index. The net weekly position rose this week for a fourth consecutive week and this week’s gain, by a total of 35,029 contracts, marks the highest one-week increase on record, according to the CFTC data dating back to 2016. The Bloomberg Index is made up of multiple types of commodities with energy comprising approximately 30% of the Index. The Index price has been surging higher since the start of the Iran war and is up by approximately 33% in just the past 90 days.

WTI Crude Oil price leads the Energy market price performance

In the Energy markets this week, WTI Crude Oil saw a strong jump by almost 12% with an 11.94% surge higher over the past five days. The Bloomberg Commodity Index comes in next with a strong 5.14% gain on the week. Gasoline was up by 1.17%.

On the downside in performance, Heating Oil dipped this week by -2.99%, while Brent Crude Oil also fell by -3.14%. The leading market for the downside was Natural Gas, which dropped by -7.44% on the week.


Energy Data:

Speculators Table Energy Futures COT Chart
Legend: Weekly Speculators Change | Speculators Current Net Position | Speculators Strength Score compared to last 3-Years (0-100 range)


Strength Scores led by Bloomberg Index & Gasoline

Speculators Strength Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Scores (a normalized measure of Speculator positions over a 3-Year range, from 0 to 100 where above 80 is Extreme-Bullish and below 20 is Extreme-Bearish) showed that the Bloomberg Index (100.0 percent) and Gasoline (62.6 percent) lead the energy markets this week.

On the downside, Natural Gas (25.0 percent) and Brent Oil (30.1 percent) comes in at the lowest strength level currently.

Strength Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (56.0 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (62.5 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (30.1 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (56.1 percent)
Natural Gas (25.0 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (21.7 percent)
Gasoline (62.6 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (64.3 percent)
Heating Oil (56.7 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (56.1 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (100.0 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (23.8 percent)

 


Bloomberg Index & WTI Crude top the 6-Week Strength Trends

Speculators Trend Energy Futures COT Chart
COT Strength Score Trends (or move index, calculates the 6-week changes in strength scores) showed that the Bloomberg Index (74.4 percent) and WTI Crude (23.3 percent) lead the past six weeks trends for the energy markets.

Gasoline (-22.5 percent) leads the downside trend scores currently with Heating Oil (-7.0 percent) as the next market with lower trend scores.

Move Statistics:
WTI Crude Oil (23.3 percent) vs WTI Crude Oil previous week (37.3 percent)
Brent Crude Oil (0.6 percent) vs Brent Crude Oil previous week (26.4 percent)
Natural Gas (11.8 percent) vs Natural Gas previous week (-0.5 percent)
Gasoline (-22.5 percent) vs Gasoline previous week (-22.2 percent)
Heating Oil (-7.0 percent) vs Heating Oil previous week (-13.0 percent)
Bloomberg Commodity Index (74.4 percent) vs Bloomberg Commodity Index previous week (-1.6 percent)


Individual COT Market Charts:

WTI Crude Oil Futures:

WTI Crude Oil Futures COT ChartThe WTI Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of 213,488 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday. This was a weekly reduction of -20,132 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 233,620 net contracts.

This week’s current strength score (the trader positioning range over the past three years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 56.0 percent. The commercials are Bearish with a score of 41.9 percent and the small traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 63.3 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Strong Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Strong Uptrend.

WTI Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:18.642.93.7
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:8.154.92.2
– Net Position:213,488-245,09131,603
– Gross Longs:378,087870,79975,768
– Gross Shorts:164,5991,115,89044,165
– Long to Short Ratio:2.3 to 10.8 to 11.7 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):56.041.963.3
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:23.3-19.4-17.1

 


Brent Crude Oil Futures:

Brent Last Day Crude Oil Futures COT ChartThe Brent Crude Oil Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of -35,815 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday. This was a weekly reduction of -18,260 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -17,555 net contracts.

This week’s current strength score (the trader positioning range over the past three years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 30.1 percent. The commercials are Bullish with a score of 69.4 percent and the small traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 70.7 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Strong Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Strong Uptrend.

Brent Crude Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:23.541.93.8
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:35.530.92.8
– Net Position:-35,81532,7763,039
– Gross Longs:69,891124,71911,470
– Gross Shorts:105,70691,9438,431
– Long to Short Ratio:0.7 to 11.4 to 11.4 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):30.169.470.7
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBullishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:0.6-4.528.7

 


Natural Gas Futures:

Natural Gas Futures COT ChartThe Natural Gas Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of -167,456 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday. This was a weekly lift of 5,151 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -172,607 net contracts.

This week’s current strength score (the trader positioning range over the past three years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bearish with a score of 25.0 percent. The commercials are Bullish with a score of 76.2 percent and the small traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 51.2 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Downtrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Downtrend.

Natural Gas Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:13.537.33.7
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:24.527.52.4
– Net Position:-167,456148,42819,028
– Gross Longs:204,139564,65656,127
– Gross Shorts:371,595416,22837,099
– Long to Short Ratio:0.5 to 11.4 to 11.5 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):25.076.251.2
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BearishBullishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:11.8-17.520.3

 


Gasoline Blendstock Futures:

RBOB Gasoline Energy Futures COT ChartThe Gasoline Blendstock Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of 68,326 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday. This was a weekly decline of -1,520 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 69,846 net contracts.

This week’s current strength score (the trader positioning range over the past three years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 62.6 percent. The commercials are Bearish with a score of 30.7 percent and the small traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 76.1 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Strong Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Strong Uptrend.

Nasdaq Mini Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:26.649.08.6
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:5.873.74.7
– Net Position:68,326-81,17212,846
– Gross Longs:87,284160,96828,280
– Gross Shorts:18,958242,14015,434
– Long to Short Ratio:4.6 to 10.7 to 11.8 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):62.630.776.1
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-22.520.9-1.8

 


#2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures:

NY Harbor Heating Oil Energy Futures COT ChartThe #2 Heating Oil NY-Harbor Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of 10,092 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday. This was a weekly rise of 525 contracts from the previous week which had a total of 9,567 net contracts.

This week’s current strength score (the trader positioning range over the past three years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish with a score of 56.7 percent. The commercials are Bearish with a score of 38.2 percent and the small traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 71.9 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Strong Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Strong Uptrend.

Heating Oil Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:15.350.917.8
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:11.063.69.4
– Net Position:10,092-29,76019,668
– Gross Longs:35,976119,53041,809
– Gross Shorts:25,884149,29022,141
– Long to Short Ratio:1.4 to 10.8 to 11.9 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):56.738.271.9
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):BullishBearishBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:-7.05.6-1.5

 


Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures:

Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures COT ChartThe Bloomberg Commodity Index Futures large speculator standing this week totaled a net position of 23,297 contracts in the data reported through Tuesday. This was a weekly lift of 35,029 contracts from the previous week which had a total of -11,732 net contracts.

This week’s current strength score (the trader positioning range over the past three years, measured from 0 to 100) shows the speculators are currently Bullish-Extreme with a score of 100.0 percent. The commercials are Bearish-Extreme with a score of 0.0 percent and the small traders (not shown in chart) are Bullish with a score of 67.3 percent.

Price Trend-Following Model: Strong Uptrend

Our weekly trend-following model classifies the current market price position as: Strong Uptrend.

Bloomberg Index Futures StatisticsSPECULATORSCOMMERCIALSSMALL TRADERS
– Percent of Open Interest Longs:40.159.30.2
– Percent of Open Interest Shorts:30.169.50.0
– Net Position:23,297-23,828531
– Gross Longs:93,806138,791573
– Gross Shorts:70,509162,61942
– Long to Short Ratio:1.3 to 10.9 to 113.6 to 1
NET POSITION TREND:
– Strength Index Score (3 Year Range Pct):100.00.067.3
– Strength Index Reading (3 Year Range):Bullish-ExtremeBearish-ExtremeBullish
NET POSITION MOVEMENT INDEX:
– 6-Week Change in Strength Index:74.4-74.0-17.0

 


Article By InvestMacroReceive our weekly COT Reports by Email

*COT Report: The COT data, released weekly to the public each Friday, is updated through the most recent Tuesday (data is 3 days old) and shows a quick view of how large speculators or non-commercials (for-profit traders) were positioned in the futures markets.

The CFTC categorizes trader positions according to commercial hedgers (traders who use futures contracts for hedging as part of the business), non-commercials (large traders who speculate to realize trading profits) and nonreportable traders (usually small traders/speculators) as well as their open interest (contracts open in the market at time of reporting).See CFTC criteria here.

All information and opinions on this website and contained in this article are for general informational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice.

War in the Middle East made the case for renewables – what’s happening in each country tells a harder story

By Ezgi Canpolat, Harvard University 

The oil-dependent world is in crisis. Ship traffic in the Strait of Hormuz – through which more than a quarter of global seaborne oil trade and a fifth of the world’s liquefied natural gas flow – is at a virtual standstill. Oil prices have climbed, briefly topping US$119 a barrel.

The largest release of oil from countries’ strategic reserves in history is under way, in an effort to ease prices. But even so, billions of people are dealing with surging energy prices and spiking food and fertilizer costs. Governments are scrambling for alternatives, too. To reduce energy demand, Sri Lanka has declared every Wednesday a holiday for public officials, Myanmar is limiting private vehicle use to every other day, and Bangladeshi colleges have canceled classes.

Leaders of South Korea and the European Commission have used the current energy crisis to call for accelerating the shift away from fossil fuels and toward homegrown renewable sources. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres put it plainly in a March 10, 2026, social media post: “There are no price spikes for sunlight and no embargoes on the wind.”

I grew up in a coal-mining town in Turkey. I now study energy transitions across the Middle East and North Africa in a research project I co-lead at Harvard University. I have seen that a country’s desire to increase renewable energy is not the same as a plan to do so.

The very region embroiled in this war reveals that there is not a linear shift from fossil fuels to renewable sources. Rather, there are distinct trajectories, driven by energy dependence, fiscal pressures, governance and stability. Disruption at the Strait of Hormuz does not mean the same thing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, as it does in Ankara, Turkey, or Baghdad, Iraq.

The petrostates hedging both sides

For Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, this crisis is a warning dressed as a windfall.

Oil prices have surged, which in theory means higher revenues. But the very infrastructure that produces and delivers that wealth is under direct attack. Iran has targeted oil refineries and shipment centers across the Gulf. The Strait of Hormuz closure is simultaneously choking off their ability to get product to market, exposing how vulnerable the infrastructure of fossil fuel wealth can be.

All three countries have also committed to boosting renewable energy production. In Saudi Arabia, for example, the government aims for renewable energy sources to account for 50% of electricity generation by 2030, up from just 3% at the end of 2023.

Saudi Arabia’s biggest group of clean energy companies has pledged to spend $17 billion on solar and wind – across all their projects, spread out over several years.

But those efforts sit alongside vastly larger investments in fossil fuel production. In 2025 alone, the country’s nationally owned oil company, Saudi Aramco, spent $52.2 billion building new oil and gas infrastructure.

This is not a contradiction. It is a strategy built on the assumption that the world will keep buying fossil fuels for decades to come. The current crisis reinforces that assumption, but it also exposes its vulnerability: As war drives up oil prices, every oil-importing country is feeling the cost of continuing oil dependence. And every stranded export proves the energy transition can’t wait.

Price shock and necessity

Energy-importing countries such as Jordan, Morocco and Turkey are investing in renewable energy for a different reason: Fossil fuel dependence is bankrupting them.

Turkey imports over 70% of its fossil fuels, including virtually all of its natural gas, 17% of which comes from Iran. Natural gas accounts for less than a fifth of electricity generation, but it is the backbone of the country’s heating and industrial sectors and a major concern if supply falters. Turkey’s energy import bill is climbing at a time when the economy is already under strain from rising borrowing costs and weakening currency value.

Jordan, which historically has imported over 90% of its energy, faces similar pressure.

But these countries would be in far worse positions had they not already been investing in alternatives.

More than half of Turkey’s installed electricity capacity now comes from renewable energy sources. Morocco built one of the world’s largest concentrated solar facilities, and renewable sources now supply 25% of the country’s electricity. Similarly, Jordan has gone from virtually no renewable electricity to renewable sources providing more than a quarter of its power in roughly a decade.

The current war has vindicated their investments in renewable energy – though the vindication has limits. The same crisis that proves the value of renewable energy investment also raises inflation, tightens credit and strains the very public finances these countries need to keep building.

Every kilowatt-hour generated by a Turkish wind turbine or a Moroccan solar panel is one that does not depend on a tanker passing through the Strait of Hormuz. But the financial pressure means building the next renewable generating project just got harder.

Crisis upon crisis

Then there are countries where this war lands on top of existing emergencies.

Iraq, the second-largest oil producer in the region and in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, depends on Iranian gas imports to generate much of its electricity – a supply line now directly threatened by the war. Oil exports through the southern port of Basra, on the Persian Gulf, fund roughly 90% of Iraq’s government revenue. If those revenues are disrupted, the government may be unable to function. Iraq already suffers chronic electricity shortages and has virtually no renewable energy capacity to fall back on.

In Yemen, Libya and Syria, energy infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed by years of conflict. These countries import fuel at global prices to run generators and keep hospitals lit. Every dollar added to the price of oil makes that harder. For them, this war is not pointing out reasons to shift to renewable sources: It is threatening energy access itself.

An international challenge

In November 2026, the U.N.’s annual climate summit comes to the region at the center of this crisis, with Turkey as host.

The war in the Middle East has made a powerful case for the economic, political and humanitarian benefits of transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. But it has also exposed something the global conversation consistently misses: Different countries are heading in different directions, based on their own circumstances, many of which predate this war.

Understanding those paths matters because it reveals what countries’ promises cannot: where the real barriers are, where the incentives already exist, and where support would make a difference – before the next disruption hits. In my view, this war has helped win the argument about whether to shift to renewable energy, but it has also highlighted a harder question: What does it actually take to build those sources, country by country?The Conversation

About the Author:

Ezgi Canpolat, Visiting Postdoctoral Scholar, Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.