Venezuelan Oil: Statism to Liberation?

From MasterResource

By Allen Brooks

“Venezuelan oil has been powering Cuba’s electricity grid, and the Trump administration may use the fuel issue to effect changes in the island-nation’s leadership.”

“More heavy oil from Venezuela will put pressure on Canada’s role as a supplier of heavy crude to the U.S. It may also pressure Saudi Arabia, which ships heavy oil to feed its refineries in the U.S.”

“Access to Venezuela’s substantial oil reserves is likely to put a cap on how high global oil prices might rise in the future….”

Little did we realize how interesting 2026’s energy market would become when we finished writing our January 3 Energy Musings, “Energy Finishes 2025 In 8th Place Out Of 11 Sectors.” Just a few hours after finishing and scheduling its publication, United States Special Forces and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents, supported by military forces, mounted a military-style campaign to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

Their arrest was to comply with a federal indictment in New York for narco-terrorism conspiracy and other charges. Those charges included cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices.

Multi-Country Ramifications

This dramatic change will have implications for global oil markets. And it might be asked if the political change underway in Venezuela marks the first domino of totalitarian regimes to fall, especially given the growing anti-government protests in Iran.

There will be many geopolitical ramifications from the Venezuelan leadership change, including the termination of sanctions on Venezuela and its oil. President Trump indicated a willingness to sell oil to China, helping Venezuela to pay down its $60 billion debt to that country.

Regionally, removing Maduro ensures that the border dispute with Guyana, which could impact its oil development, will be a non-issue. The news for Cuba, however, is not as favorable. Venezuelan oil has been powering Cuba’s electricity grid, and the Trump administration may use the fuel issue to effect changes in the island-nation’s leadership. That would be consistent with the administration’s desire to enforce the Monroe Doctrine’s policy of preventing foreign intervention in the governments of the Americas. Russia and Iran have long been supporters of the Cuban regime, as well as the Venezuelan regime. Putting these U.S. adversaries on notice to stop meddling in South American politics is an essential message from the Trump administration’s police action dealing with Maduro and his wife.

The decision to allow Venezuela to sell oil to China ensures that the nation will retain its commercial relationships, which are essential for ongoing international business activity. At the same time, it is a signal to China that the U.S. will enforce the Monroe Doctrine policies, removing the Americas as a focal point for increased Chinese involvement, which has involved significant investment in mines, ports, and other South American industries. The move also puts China on notice that its Venezuelan oil flows could be shut off instantly over unfriendly actions towards the U.S., changing the energy landscape for China. This risk may explain why China has been building its oil inventories despite flagging oil demand.

Oil Reserve Markup

Venezuela is estimated to have 303 billion barrels of crude oil reserves as of 2023, 17% of proven world reserves. Significantly, the reserve estimate was increased during the Chávez regime from 80 billion barrels to 303 billion barrels. While the reserve write-up was audited by the petroleum engineering company, Ryder Scott, it was prepared for the Venezuelan dictatorship.

The primary challenge for Venezuelan crude oil is its heavy, sour nature. That makes the oil a lower-quality supply, selling at a discount from world prices. Much of the oil comes from the Orinoco belt, which requires it to be mixed with diluent to enable transportation and refining. That also lowers the oil’s value and creates logistical issues, because without the diluent, the oil cannot be converted into a commercial product. Securing diluent supplies has been a recurring logistical and financial challenge, and is unlikely to change materially in the near term.

Four Oil Charts

Based on data from the Energy Institute and from BP, we have created several charts that show the role of Venezuelan oil in the global oil mix and the nation’s significance within OPEC since 1965. Venezuela was a founding member of OPEC in 1960 because it feared becoming a victim of international oil companies, which were unwilling to pay a fair price for oil extracted from OPEC member countries. [Ed note: The U.S. Mandatory Oil Import Program in 1959 created an oil surplus that sent prices down.]

It took more than a decade for the oil supply pendulum to swing in favor of OPEC members. When it did in the early 1970s, the international oil industry changed dramatically, with pricing power shifting into the hands of the host producing countries. In contrast, countries with mature production risked supply shortages and costly alternatives.

The first two charts show that Venezuela was a more important source of global and OPEC oil supplies in the 1960s and 1970s than it is today. They also show how Venezuela’s market share has declined sharply in recent years. What the charts show is how Venezuela’s output and market share fell sharply during those early years as other OPEC members rapidly expanded their outputs. Moreover, with lower-quality oil, Venezuelan supplies were less desirable to refiners seeking more low-sulfur, light crude oil to convert into gasoline and diesel fuels for the transportation market.

During that period of declining market share, the industrialized world was shifting its electricity generation away from oil to coal and natural gas, reducing the market potential for Venezuelan crude. Remember that this market shift was driven by a change in global oil pricing, from international oil companies to the Middle East OPEC host countries.

Chart 1: Venezuela’s global market share fell by nearly two-thirds between 1965 and 1977.

Chart 2Venezuela has struggled to sustain relevance within OPEC in recent years.

For readers who prefer more granular oil production data, the following two charts show Venezuela’s output relative to the world oil supply and OPEC’s output. The challenges of sustaining and growing its oil production reflected the dynamics of Venezuela’s political situation and the tactics of its national oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA).

Hugo Chávez assumed the Presidency of Venezuela on February 2, 1999. At that time, world oil markets were in turmoil, partly due to PDVSA policies to maximize output, disregarding OPEC quotas and price objectives. This was a major contributor to the 1998 oil price collapse. The prior Venezuelan government had nearly abandoned OPEC as it struggled to avoid a financial collapse.

Chávez and his new oil minister, Ali Rodriquez Araque, completely reversed the situation. Along with the governments of Mexico and Saudi Arabia, a new understanding on quotas and higher prices was negotiated between OPEC and other oil-exporting countries.

A bit of personal history. In late February of 1999, as President of the National Association of Petroleum Investment Analysts (NAPIA), we were part of a group invited by PDVSA to spend a week touring Venezuela’s oil industry. PDVSA officials were hoping to curry favor from the investment community, as it would need to tap financial markets to sustain and grow its operations.

To appreciate the charade the Venezuelan government was attempting to conduct, on our first day’s lunch, Oil Minister Ali Rodriquez spoke. A condition was that he would talk in Spanish. Fortunately, we had a member fluent in Spanish who volunteered to conduct a contemporaneous translation. Sitting at the head table with other leaders of NAPIA and me was the U.S. Ambassador. When Rodriquez finished his talk and the Q&A, he sat down and conversed in perfect English with the Ambassador.

The new agreement between OPEC and other oil exporters led to a dramatically different oil market starting in 2000. That year’s Venezuelan oil export revenues were a record of $27.3 billion, a significant increase above the previous peak of $19.1 billion in 1981. However, there was a substantial difference in the impact on the Venezuelan government’s take. In 1981, PDVSA’s $19.1 billion in revenues generated $13.9 billion in royalties and income taxes. In 2000, the $27.3 billion in oil export proceeds generated only $11.3 billion in government income. Royalties and income taxes amounted to 73% of export revenues in 1981, but only 41% in 2000. This shift was mainly due to changes in how PDVSA structured its agreements after 1989, when it opened up its marginal oil fields to international oil companies. Those contracts were structured as service contracts rather than production agreements.

Furthermore, in 1989, when Venezuela came close to insolvency and was forced to subscribe to International Monetary Fund and World Bank adjustment programs and reforms, PDVSA adopted the worldwide accounting rules for reporting profits and losses. This brought down the ring fence around PDVSA’s Venezuelan operations. It was forced to transfer to Venezuela the costs it incurred in its foreign ventures, thus increasing the profits deemed to have accrued outside the country. The difference in tax rates between Venezuela and the United States was 67.7% versus 34%. Moreover, PDVSA also charged its Venezuelan accounts with the financial costs of its nine billion dollars in foreign debt, further reducing domestic profits and the taxes it owed to the Venezuelan government.

Chart 3Despite its best efforts to increase production, oil output has been in a free-fall.

Chart 4: Venezuela (in gold) remains a minor player in OPEC.

Given the unsettled leadership situation in the government, we should not expect any near-term change in the oil market from Maduro’s removal. At the moment, his vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, has assumed leadership of the country. Unless the military leaders shift their allegiance away from her to the popularly elected politicians in 2024, the current turmoil is likely to continue. Will this lead to a further exodus of Venezuelans, or will people be willing to become active in demanding the leadership they desire?

An Oil Revival?

In the longer term, if the leadership changes to that of popularly elected officials, we can expect Western oil companies to re-enter Venezuela. There is also the possibility that PDVSA will be able to rehire prior professional employees who emigrated rather than live under the Chávez and Maduro regimes. A return of Western oil companies, with their technical talent and financial resources, plus long working histories and knowledge of the country’s oil resources for some companies, will put Venezuela on a path to increased oil output. Estimates are that the sector needs investments of $10 billion a year for many years to restore the industry’s productive capacity.

Few people know the condition of the country’s oil fields, its transportation network, and refining capacity. There may need to be a significant investment before production growth can be achieved. How long will this take, and what price will the international oil companies demand to return to Venezuela? Those are impossible questions to answer now.

While we may be surprised by how quickly the domestic oil industry changes and improves, without a significant number of former PDVSA workers returning, it is safer to expect a long, slow improvement in Venezuela’s production growth. There may be a jump of 250,000 barrels a day in output, assuming PDVSA can acquire sufficient diluent. However, sellers may be reluctant to commit to PDVSA until political stabilization is achieved.

More heavy oil from Venezuela will put pressure on Canada’s role as a supplier of heavy crude to the U.S. It may also pressure Saudi Arabia, which ships heavy oil to feed its refineries in the U.S. China might become a buyer of Canadian and Saudi heavy oil output in the future, as a supply diversification move, further altering global supply chains.

Access to Venezuela’s substantial oil reserves is likely to put a cap on how high global oil prices might rise in the future, given the lack of industry reinvestment in recent years. That could be a good thing for the industry in the long term, as demand might grow more than the International Energy Agency predicts by 2050, with lower near-term oil prices.

The issue of energy dominance is a key outcome of the weekend’s events in Venezuela. Europe struggles to understand it, while China and the U.S. fully comprehend its significance. Russia and Iran are in the process of learning the new energy landscape. Everyone will need to rethink their views of the geopolitical and energy landscapes after last Saturday night’s events.

————–

G. Allen Brooks has been actively engaged in the oil patch in various roles for the last half-century. He has been an energy securities analyst, an oilfield service company manager, a consultant to energy company managements and a director of various oilfield service companies.

Since early 2005, Mr. Brooks has been engaged in consulting as an advisor to PPHB LP, a boutique oilfield service investment banking firm, where he provides proprietary research for the firm’s partners and analysts. PPHB also distributes Musings From the Oil Patch, the highly regarded energy newsletter authored by Mr. Brooks since 1999.

An Economics graduate of the University of Connecticut, Brooks also has an M.S. degree in Economics from Cornell University. He started his investment career in 1969. Mr. Brooks lives in Houston, Texas.

Energy Musings contains articles and analyses dealing with important issues and developments within the energy industry, including historical perspective, with potentially significant implications for executives planning their companies’ future.

5 8 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Subscribe
Notify of
126 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
heme212
January 6, 2026 6:11 pm

more importantly, where does the revenue go?

Reply to  heme212
January 7, 2026 3:34 am

Trump said Venezuela will transfer 30,000 to 50,000 barrels of oil to the U.S., which the United States will sell and then return the profits to Venezuela.

Trump may use some of that oil to go into the U.S. Strategic Pertroleum Reserve to replace all the oil Biden sold out of it in an effort to reduce gasoline prices before the election. Democrats think the SPR is there to get them elected.

Btw, gasoline prices in my neighborhood are down close to two dollars per gallon. That’s about two dollars per gallon less than we were paying under Biden.

According to a couple of CNBC analysts, a reduction of $0.80 cents per gallon causes the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to increase by one percent. One percent of the U.S. economy is a very big number.

So, we can expect at least an additional two percent added to the U.S. GDP due to Trump’s “Drill, Baby, Drill” policy.

And it wouldn’t surprise me to see an additional $0.80 reduction in gasoline prices as time goes along.

Ole Trump may equal Reagan’s top growth rate of seven percent annually before it’s all over.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:33 am

“Trump said”
ROFLMAO.

William Howard
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 7:12 am

on a much bigger base

KevinM
Reply to  William Howard
January 7, 2026 9:48 am

Comparing star athletes across eras is a sports standard. I’ve heard hundreds of times the average height and weight of the undefeated Miami Dolphins offensive linemen, how they would look like children next to today’s NFL’s offensive linemen.

For European audiences, convert “undefeated Miami Dolphins offensive linemen” to Erling Haaland.

SxyxS
Reply to  heme212
January 7, 2026 3:34 am

As no one ever votes for this wars,
these wars are driven by the Wall Street Lobby that traditionally redirects the “democratic process into its traditional direction.

Therefore the revenue logically goes to the bosses of the lobby.

In military terms Halliburton, Raytheon etc
in energy terms Exxon, Chevron etc.
A short look at the stocks of those corporations and the hockeysticks that can be seen after Maduro was freedomed out of presidency
tells us that everyone in the trading business knows where the revenue goes –
which is quite the reckless thing,
as the now liberated and democratized Venezuela can chose whomever they want to chose to develop their oil potential – and if you have dozens of countries to chose as partners, the chance that you’ll end up with the USA as partner is about 5%
and if we take into account that Latin Americans love the USA as much as muslims love Israel the chances that the they’ll partner up with the US is about 0% .

Yet traditionally, those 3 guys in the country who love the USA will end up to run the country.
And that’s why the shares of these companies go up.

William Howard
Reply to  SxyxS
January 7, 2026 7:14 am

not to mention that their ownership was stolen by Chavez

Reply to  heme212
January 7, 2026 9:37 am

The final straw that brings out the US war machinery against oil backed regimes is the currency they use to sell their oil. Saddam was gone after he started accepting Euros for oil instead of using US$. Khaddafi was pushing alternates to US dollars. Maduro was selling oil for Chinese Yuan. Basically, demand for US dollars by other nations to settle their energy purchases is a financial windfall for the US that its banking institutions can’t afford to lose, and they call the shots.

KevinM
Reply to  DMacKenzie
January 7, 2026 9:50 am

Why would such a situation exist?

Tom Halla
January 6, 2026 6:28 pm

Multiple issues. One is socialist regimes
looting foreign investors in their country, and acting as if the mines or wells ran themselves.
Another is “international law”, which I think is an oxymoron.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 6, 2026 7:06 pm

International Law is something only middle tier countries care about the big players Russia, China, USA have always had the attitude come and make me obey it.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Leon de Boer
January 6, 2026 7:27 pm

my point exactly.

KevinM
Reply to  Leon de Boer
January 7, 2026 9:52 am

Is Russia a top tier country? Other than “size of nuclear arsenal” which of its stats stands out?

observa
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 6, 2026 9:16 pm

Lefties like to contextualise these things-
Inside Venezuela: Public Reaction With Román Camacho & Will Trump Invade Greenland? | Jan. 5, 2026
Leaves you wondering about all their international law and moral outrage over Assad in Moscow and soon the Supreme Retiree Khamenei looking for a cushy retirement home too. Crickets!

Reply to  observa
January 7, 2026 3:00 am

“Lefties like to contextualise these things-
Inside Venezuela: Public Reaction With Román Camacho & Will Trump Invade Greenland? | Jan. 5, 2026”

Right now, Trump is trying to buy Greenland. I don’t think he will need to invade Greenland unless the Chicoms or Russians try to set up bases there. Then he will invade Greenland.

Trump wants foreign adversaries to stay out of the Americas. It used to be called the Monroe Doctrine. Now it’s called the Donroe Doctine.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 3:56 am

Once again a pro Trumper says something silly. You know nothing about the actual Monroe doctrine..

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 5:29 am

so tell us

KevinM
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 7, 2026 9:55 am

Yes, bn please reply to JZ’s request. We can all use Wikipedia but you seem to know something special.

KevinM
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 9:54 am

I wonder if Greenland Acreage can be bought with Venezuelan revenue?

SxyxS
Reply to  observa
January 7, 2026 3:43 am

Greenland has a population of 55000 thousand.
Easy steal.

To bribe them into becoming the Costa Rica on the rocks (for reasons of national security – there are really idiots who believe this shit)
they may need 15000 dollars per family per year to buy their pro -US votes and keep the happy.
As such a takeover comes along with a multipronged approach
the CiA has started bribing the politician alongside some honeypot-Epstein schemes.

Reply to  SxyxS
January 7, 2026 5:30 am

sounds like a plan 🙂

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  SxyxS
January 7, 2026 1:46 pm

As opposed to the idiotic shit you believe.

GregInHouston
January 6, 2026 6:31 pm

I think this is an error: (Probably by the editor?): “It may also pressure Saudi Arabia, which ships heavy oil to feed its refineries in the U.S.”

I believe the Saudi production is primarily a light crude. Much of our imported heavy crude comes from Brazil. Happy to be corrected if I’m wrong.

Scissor
Reply to  GregInHouston
January 6, 2026 7:58 pm

From EIA: “Saudi Arabia produces a range of crude oils, from heavy to super light. Of Saudi Arabia’s total crude oil production capacity, about 65 to 70 percent is considered light gravity, with about 25 percent considered medium gravity, and the rest heavy. The country is moving to reduce the share of the latter two grades. Lighter grades generally are produced onshore, while medium and heavy grades come mainly from offshore fields. Most Saudi oil production, except for extra light and super light, is considered sour, containing relatively high levels of sulfur. Saudi Aramco said that its fields do not require the use of enhanced oil recovery techniques, although fields in the Neutral Zone could require steam flooding.”

Reply to  GregInHouston
January 7, 2026 6:11 am

…heavy oil to feed its refineries in the U.S

That describes Canada – Tar Sands of Alberta … the ‘Saudi Arabia of the North’

Canadian oil, especially from Alberta’s oil sands, is predominantly considered heavy, sour crude, meaning it’s thick (viscous), has high sulfur content, and lower API gravity, making it harder and costlier to refine than light sweet crude

Western Canadian Select [US$/bbl] 44.78 -2.59%

Bob
January 6, 2026 8:55 pm

Good information.

Scarecrow Repair
January 6, 2026 10:27 pm

Good coverage, thanks.

However, sellers may be reluctant to commit to PDVSA until political stabilization is achieved.

That “political stabilization” applies to the US too. How many companies are likely to dump billions into Venezuela when Democrat wins in 2026 or 2028 could pull the rug out from under them? All the Dems need do is win one chamber to do a lot of damage.

George Thompson
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
January 7, 2026 7:45 am

Which would be par for the course…anything Dems touch turns to crap and graft.

January 6, 2026 10:40 pm

China […] flagging oil demand

Wonder why that is.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 2:41 am

It must be all those windmills.

We would just love to see China try to power its society with windmills.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 3:36 am

Maybe ‘cos they are building lots of coal fired electricity generating plants.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 5:32 am

Their economy is in trouble.

MarkW
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 9:43 am

Declining population, declining economy. What a mystery.

KevinM
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 10:00 am

Been waiting for Chinese internal consumption to take over for its mercantile machine since the 1990s.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 1:41 pm

Still getting FAR more energy from oil than from wind and solar.

Only thing that will replace oil .. is COAL and GAS. !!

China-energy
January 6, 2026 10:58 pm

The situation is in flux. It’s way to early to jump to conclusions. Predictions are hard, especially about the future.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  OR For
January 7, 2026 8:01 am

Absolutely correct.

Most of these “predictions” are merely opinions that reflect the motivation of the opinion provider.
Very little analysis of alternatives.
There are several possibilities that are not considered.

Start with DJT is not a politician, he is a businessman, with a forte in real estate.
Then there is the art of the deal.

No. I will not explain. Look it up for yourselves.

KevinM
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
January 7, 2026 10:01 am

Greenezuela?

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  KevinM
January 7, 2026 12:02 pm

We shall see.
At this point, the true objective is hidden.
I have my suspicions.

  1. An much larger base on Greenland for missile and air defense, radars, and naval
  2. The pesky rare earth minerals

Am I correct?
Stay tuned to this station!

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
January 7, 2026 1:42 pm

Certainly, oil investment and sales is needed to MVGA. !

puckhog
Reply to  OR For
January 7, 2026 9:28 am

Fully agree. I’m from Alberta, so I have my own biases, but I’ve used the last couple days to modestly increase my holdings of Alberta oil sands producers. I think the expectations about Venezuela production ramping up are overly optimistic, for a couple of reasons.

First, global prices are not at a place to support large investment in growing production in virtually any region. All North American producers are exercising capital discipline at the moment. And I think the scale of investment needed in Venezuela is probably not fully understood. They’ve had decades of production and infrastructure facilities more or less sitting stagnant.

Second, the political situation is still largely unknown. Who will succeed in Venezuela, what does the transition plan look like, and what assurances are in place to confidently invest tens or hundreds of billions of dollars? Trump has three years left in his term, if the majors started heavy investment today, three years is probably just starting to see meaningful production increases. How confident are those companies in the post-Trump period? If the Democrats re-take the White House, congress, senate or some combo, will they take the same stance on Venezuela? Tough to see enough confidence to make such large investments.

Like I said, I definitely have my own slant, but I’d be very surprised by a significant change in production over the short, or even medium term.

Rod Evans
January 7, 2026 12:07 am

This intervention in foreign affairs by Trump has thrown a hand grenade into the cosy closed world of left wing politics.
The oft mentioned international law is the construct of the left wing political class.
They advance is to buttress their otherwise hopeless socialist policies. Trump has shown in one audacious act that international law is valueless to those who thought it protected them from real power politics.
The fall out from the weekends snatch action is yet to be fully seen. The dictators of the world will be sleeping less easy now than they did last Friday night.
With the USA now holding power over the world’s biggest oil reserves as well as already being the world’s largest national producer gives the Trump administration immense leverage over world affairs, not least what is happening in Ukraine and Iran. The effect this change will have on China’s military advance and its stated political position to take over Taiwan will be interesting to say the least.
The UN is now on notice, as is its International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the lesser ICC.
Here m the UK the joke doing the rounds, is for a request to be sent to the FBI/DEA/CIA to send the snatch squad over to 10 Downing St,
We live in interesting times as they say in Greenland, Cuba, and many other places of ‘interest’……

Reply to  Rod Evans
January 7, 2026 12:33 am

Yeah, there is now way trumps policies backfire on the US…

Keitho
Editor
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 1:22 am

Continually hoping for Trump to fail is not really a policy.

Reply to  Keitho
January 7, 2026 1:30 am

He’s doing it already, the question is how big and beautiful it will be. And when his supporters will realise.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 5:44 am

Love him or hate him, he has achieved a hell of a lot and some you lefty loons claimed was impossible.

Take this one (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/08/21/key-findings-about-us-immigrants/)

In January 2025, 53.3 million immigrants lived in the United States – the largest number ever recorded. In the ensuing months, however, more immigrants left the country or were deported than arrived. By June, the country’s foreign-born population had shrunk by more than a million people, marking its first decline since the 1960s.

Democrats claimed it was impossible to stop or even slow immigration.

Reply to  Leon de Boer
January 7, 2026 5:56 am

Is that positive for the US?

Leon de Boer
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 6:38 am

Unless you can house and have employment for them there is no positive it’s a massive negative. That is the problem most countries with high immigration and why it is causing.such blow back politically.

George Thompson
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 7:51 am

Absolutely…see Minnesota for your enlightenment.

MarkW
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 9:47 am

Yes

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 1:48 pm

When those illegal immigrant are either sucking on the taxpayer teat and fraudulently obtaining tax money…

.. or are violent criminal and cartel members…

.. getting rid of them is a huge bonus for the USA.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 3:55 pm

Yes it is. Because they come here and immediately get gov’t assistance, and stay on it forever. This isn’t 1920, when people who came here would have to actually work to survive and succeed. The poem on the Statue of Liberty became null and void once the welfare state began.

MarkW
Reply to  Keitho
January 7, 2026 9:46 am

This is what he has been told to believe. He will never waiver.

KevinM
Reply to  Keitho
January 7, 2026 10:04 am

Feels like its been USA tv news policy for two solid decades – even when another party was in power.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 7, 2026 1:45 pm

Only thing slowing down full progress in the MAGA agenda…

.. is the America-hating Democrats and their far-left judges and paid protestors..

Rod Evans
Reply to  Rod Evans
January 7, 2026 12:34 am

This article carried today in the Daily Telegraph gives an insight into just how ridiculous our current PM Starmer is. He champions the work of his energy minister, Ed Miliband who wants to increase still further pointless wind farms in Scotland.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/01/07/scotlands-biggest-offshore-wind-farm-wasting-energy/
We literally can not afford to go on like this, where is that snatch squad when you need them?

observa
Reply to  Rod Evans
January 7, 2026 2:08 am

They’re currently indisposed ROFL at the wokies and Marxists being entertained by their new lover boy Comical Ali-
Iran claims it has entered ‘full-scale war’ with the United States

It will take a while to pull themselves together to jump on the Globemasters to secure Tehran airport for the return of the King. The irony of no more kings just jester puppets will be utterly lost on the Dimmocrats and usual suspects.

Reply to  observa
January 7, 2026 2:56 am

The Mad Mullahs of Iran are already looking for a place to hide.

All it took was a forceful threat from a credible U.S. president. The Iranian people will do the rest.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:49 am

Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei reportedly plans to escape to Moscow like Bashar al-Assad if his regime can’t regain control. They already are in a full scale war with there own people not sure USA is too worried 🙂

Reply to  Rod Evans
January 7, 2026 2:50 am

“The oft mentioned international law is the construct of the left wing political class.”

The United States is not going to pay attention to “international law”. Not even Democrat presidents pay attention.

And the “War Powers Act” passed by radical leftists during the Vietnam war, in the 1970’s, as a means to reign in presidential power is unconstitutional. It has never been tested in the U.S. Supreme Court and if it ever is, will be struck down as infringing on the president’s war powers authority.

If Congress doesn’t like a war the president is prosecuting there are a couple of things they can do: They can cut all funds for the war, and/or they can impeach and remove the president from office. Short of those actions, they cannot restrict the president. Whining has no effect, other than to irritate people like me..

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 8:14 am

Ah. A Constitutionalist! Well met!

KevinM
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 10:12 am

The supreme court would have to determine whether the president’s war powers authority exists in the absence of a declared war.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  KevinM
January 7, 2026 12:04 pm

The Supreme Court, of course, can interpret the Constitution and precedents to determine the scope of the Presidents authority for limited military engagements.

And no, I am not agreeing with declaring a national emergency in this case.

Reply to  Rod Evans
January 7, 2026 4:04 am

It is pretty standard US policy: don’t like a current foreign government? Call it a ‘dictatorship’ that needs to be removed. And it’s perfectly fine to put in your own puppet dictator whom you can control.
That’s Democracy for ya. Otherwise known as mafia politics. You can never dress that up as something decent or beautiful.
“Greenland, we gotta have it..!”. Is there anything more insane anybody has ever heared from a US president?
Some people on this platform seems to cheerlead that. It indicates the total corruption of mind. There is NO way you can lay that on ‘leftish lunacy’. It is of it’s own making. Disturbing..

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 5:37 am

realpolitik

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 5:38 am

My caution is not about any of that. Up to a point the USA can do what it likes.
However doing what you like does not equate to getting the answers you, or your voters, want,..
It is the incredible stupidity of Trump in foreign policy that makes the rest of the world cringe.
I will give you 10 to 1 that this ‘special military operation’ does not achieve what is being promised.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Leo Smith
January 7, 2026 8:26 am

And I will give you 10:1 that this “special military operation” never happens and it is just put forth to create leverage for something else.

Rod Evans
Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 6:03 am

“Greenland, we gotta have it..!”. Is there anything more insane anybody has ever heared from a US president?”
Well, how about that President who came out with, “I did not have sexual relations with thayt woman”….
Or how about the President who said “we can come out of Afghanistan promptly because I have confidence in the present Afghan security forces”
I grant you Donald Trump has a casual way with diplomatic convention/utterances. But it takes the BBC to literally put words into his mouth and advance actions he did not condone into the minds of naïve observers.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 8:25 am

“We gotta have it. Is there anything more insane anybody has ever heard from a US president?”

Hawaii. Alaska. Puerto Rico. Cuba. Panama. Midway. Wake Island. Philippines, Louisiana, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, California, Florida… In fact the whole of CONUS.

In the War of 1812, there was serious consideration to annexing the whole of Canada.

You are projecting your personal biases on your limited visibility on geopolitics.
I submit there is more to this than has been revealed.

Trump is tactical. He is a real estate businessman, not a politician. Art of the deal.

You would be wise to start considering there could be alternative explanations and examine those as well.

Just as I am constantly considering you might be right.

1saveenergy
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
January 7, 2026 1:02 pm

“Trump is tactical. He is a real estate businessman, not a politician. Art of the deal.”

Trump, through his business dealings, came to make a small fortune …

… from an inherited large fortune, via 6 bankruptcies !!

So he’s Happy to lose other people’s money & then get a free pass.!!

KevinM
Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 10:16 am

 Is there anything more insane anybody has ever heared from a US president?

“John F. Kennedy’s quotes show a complex view on Vietnam, emphasizing that it was “their war” for the Vietnamese to win with U.S. aid, but he also stressed helping them win against Communism, calling South Vietnam a “keystone in the arch”.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  KevinM
January 7, 2026 12:06 pm

Domino Theory anyone?

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Rod Evans
January 7, 2026 8:05 am

Trump was elected in 2016 to be the disrupter.
His opponents did everything they could to shackle him.
I have serious unanswered questions about the 2020 election. I am making no claims it was “stolen” but I do have a lot of unanswered questions.

DJT came back in 2024 and is not disrupting not just US politics, but world politics.
Of course there is risk. Of course there are unexpected/unintended consequences.
But I believe the world needed a wake up call.

So grab a beer and some popcorn and watch the show.

January 7, 2026 2:38 am

Syria has fallen.
Iran is in turmoil.
Central Africa has been warned on Christmas Day with the Nigeria strikes.
And now Venezuela has been hit with the same kidnapping tactic that Russia tried on Zelensky, but failed.

Russia is humiliated and looking weaker, day by day. Its allies know Russia cannot help them anymore.

With Ukraine bleeding Russia on land and threatening to copy the USA by privateering the Russian oil fleet at sea, Putin is now very vulnerable.

All the CIA have to do is carry on with this policy, and stop the senile codger by the ballroom from declaring war on a NATO member, and the USA’s pre-eminence in the world will be restored.

Only Trump can save Russia now. And without Russia, China cannot expend it’s Belt and Road initiative globally.

SxyxS
Reply to  MCourtney
January 7, 2026 4:13 am

Thank you for exposing US global terrorism and its use of proxiesso openly
and showing your unconditional support of it – so much honesty is rare these days.

But what do you mean by ” only Trump can save Russia ” – from what?
You obviously don’t mean US terrorism.

Russia can also blow up western tankers and those tankers are not being “privateered” (what a slimy word ) by Ukraine as Ukraine does not have the capacity to track nor to destroy them.
They are being blown up by UK and Starmer won’t listen to Trump.

Reply to  SxyxS
January 7, 2026 5:39 am

Trump can destroy NATO by attacking another NATO member state (Denmark).
That would embolden the pro-Russia factions in eastern and central Europe.
That would save Putin and delay – maybe even prevent – the democratisation of Russia.

If he can be kept distracted with his own hemisphere, the West can break the Russian oligarchs and eventually have an EU that stretches from China to the Atlantic.
Vladivostok to be shared, probably.

Reply to  SxyxS
January 7, 2026 5:42 am

UK not blowing up tankers, Starmer more chicken than TACO.

When I was a stupid child I used to throw matches into boxes of fireworks, too,

Whichever way this all ends will not be the way Putin or Trump intended.

Trumps politics is as simplistic and stupid as Mann’s climate change theory

Reply to  SxyxS
January 7, 2026 5:51 am

“so much honesty is rare these days”

Honesty is the best policy- better than the lame, idealist policies of lefties, like the new dictator of NYC.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  SxyxS
January 7, 2026 5:54 am

Now that was funny 🙂

Reply to  MCourtney
January 7, 2026 5:49 am

The USA is already preeminent. Trump is goofing everyone with talk of invading Greenland. That’s his style. Anyone foolish enough to take him literally needs to grow up. He likes to threaten others so they bend to his will without sending in the marines.

I have an opinion on what Trump thinks of Russia. He doesn’t give a dam for Russia or Putin. He’d love to see Ukraine continue to bog down Russia so it frees up America to get aggressive everywhere. And he realizes that if America stays aggressive against Russia, it’ll stiffen the Russian spines to not back down in their war. Europe can handle Russia by itself. It has several times the population and a vastly larger economy- and Ukraine seems to be doing just fine. The pretense that he likes and respects Putin is absurd. It’s clear that he doesn’t easily like and respect people so why should he like Putin, an ugly little dictator of a mere regional power? It’s all part of his game and he’s playing it very nicely. He’s outplaying most of the media and almost all other national leaders. And he has a powerful team to work with- especially “little Rubio” who is extremely sharp. I saw Rubio being interviewed by some typical idiot lefty journalist who thought his questions to Rubio were going to challenge him- but nope, Rubio kicked butt in his replies. And extremely fast too.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 7, 2026 8:32 am

Trump and Putin.

No one seems to consider, except possibly you, that this apparent “friendship” is a tactical ruse.

If you are going to go in to force someone to change, would you alert them and allow them to prepare a defense or would you project a good old buddy relationship so when the blow comes it catches him off balance.

Putin is no slacker.
Trump is no slacker.

Game on!

January 7, 2026 3:08 am

Trump is planning on getting cooperation from Maduro’s vice president, to transition Venezuela to a legitimate democracy.

The former vice president, now the president, at first was defiant, but after Trump said publicly that she better cooperate or she will be treated worse than Maduro, she has changed her tune and is now *very* cooperative.

Trump established his credibility with the president of Venezuela when he snatched Maduro out of his safe place.

The rest of Maduro’s administration knows that they may be next if they don’t comply with President Trump’s orders.

Democrats were criticizing Trump for not going after Maduro during Trump’s first term. Now that Trump has arrested Maduro, the Democrats are complaining that Trump went after Maduro.

Democrats are insane. Nothing good comes from electing Democrats. If you vote for them, then you too are insane, because you are voting against your own best interests.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 4:10 am

No pal, YOU are insane. Just like the deep state underpinning this which runs both houses. But you don’t care as long as you get what you want. You don’t see it. You think people like me are whining. But we are afraid of rivers of blood. So should everyone. And you will STILL lose.

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 5:53 am

“But we are afraid…”

Too much fear from your perspective.

“All we have to fear is fear itself.”

Leon de Boer
Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 6:52 am

Think you are on your own about that fear. In the end we all die so we all lose there is no winner 🙂

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Leon de Boer
January 7, 2026 12:10 pm

Humans, all of us, share a common affliction.
It has a 100% mortality rate.
It is acquired at birth (actually conception).

It is called life.

Instead of fearing death, try celebrating life and make the most of what you have been given.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:44 am

The problem is the democrats are simply gay, but the MAGA are simply naive.

Nothing can be done about that except give the USA the isolation – nay quarantine – it desperately craves and needs.

January 7, 2026 3:53 am

This is the acid test. If you support Trump’s Venezuela action then your mind is totally corrupted and ALL you care about is power politics. Those who fly this flag have killed MAGA..

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 5:47 am

Its never a moral issue in big stick politics, But a little intelligence goes a long way to making best use of brute force.

I don’t see this special military operation ultimately getting the results that are desired any more then the last one did,

Its all about as one dimensional as Naomi Oreskes.

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 5:54 am

After you graduate from junior high school, come back and try again.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 6:05 am

What has power politics got to do with things? The country was racked with internal division and basically non functional basket case. Something was going to give eventually and cause an implosion which would further destabilize surrounding countries. Obviously the CIA worked out they could cut out a cancer with a single stroke and give the country a chance and trump gave the green light and they enacted the plan.

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 1:56 pm

Democrats put a $25 Million bounty on Maduro… Trump collected it.. 🙂

GET OVER IT !!

Ask yourself why you are supporting a Cuban-backed unelected dictator who has totally destroyed the country. SHAME. !

January 7, 2026 4:22 am

Forever Wars and Nationbuilding.

Since Trump snatched Maduro out of Venezuela, we are hearing a lot from the appeaser Leftwing and the Isolationist Rightwing about “Forever Wars” and how we don’t want to get into something like that in the future, and they FEAR that Trump’s actions in Venezuela will lead to a Forever War and Nationbuilding and will only end badly as it did in Vietnam, Iraq and Afganistan.

But the Appeasers and Isloationists are learning the Wrong Lesons from history.

It was not Nationbuilding that caused the failures in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Instead, it was Democrats in Power who screwed all these wars up.

What should be feared is that Democrats get political control of our wars. They screw things up every time this happens.

To prevent Forever Wars, we must prevent Democrats from having any control over them.

Vietnam:

The United States military could have defeated North Vietnam’s military in a matter of months had they been given the go-ahead.

Democrats never gave them the go-ahead. Instead, Lyndon Johnson proceeded to restrict the U.S. military’s ability to act and these restrictions put the U.S. in a 10+ year war of attrition in Vietnam. A war that could have been concluded in a matter of months took over ten years to complete.

The Tet Offensive by the North Vietnamese military in 1968 is a good example. After reading all the anti-war lies coming out of the American News Media (essentially North Vietnamese propagada), where the News Media was claiming the U.S. military was being beaten badly by North Vietnam and was barely hanging on in Vietnam by a fingernail, the Vietnames believed their own propaganda and decided to launch an all-out attack on South Vietnam and the U.S. military.

The North Vietnamese attacked over 100 cities in South Vietnam during the Tet New Year’s holidays, when most South Vietnamese troops were home celebrating the holidays with their families.

Within a few days, the U.S. military and South Vietnamese military gained control of the situation and proceeded to smash the North Viethamese military and forced them to run away home.

Btw, the Lies about the Vietnam war coming out of the American News Media is what caused my to go to Vietnam. I was in the Army at the time, serving in Germany, and I kept reading all these reports about how the American military was being defeated at every turn, and I said to myself, this can’t be true. If this is true, then my whole worldview is wrong. And I had to know whether I was wrong or not, and so I volunteered to go to Vietnam to see for myself.

When I got there, I found out that the American News Media was lying about the Vietnam war. Nothing they claimed was true. The U.S. military was kicking ass and taking names. I have never believed the Leftwing Media since that time. I found out what they are really all about: Radical Leftwing Propagada. They are still the same today. Don’t believe a word they say unless you verify it.

So after the Tet Offensive, the North Vietnamese tried to launch another offensive in May of 1968, which was called “Mini-Tet” because the attacks were a shadow of the attacks that took place in February. That’s because North Vietnam’s abilty to wage war was severly crippled by their failed Tet Offensive, and they lauched Mini-Tet in an effort to show the world they were not hurt, but they ended up doing just the opposite.

Eventually, a peace agreement was signed in 1973, which required that North Vietnamese troops withdraw back to North Vietnam, and American troops would go back to the United States.

When United States combat troops left South Vietnam, it was still South Vietnams. No war had been lost. Nationbuilding in South Vietnam was successful.

But then the Democrats in Congress decided they did not want to support South Vietnam anymore and decided to cut their military assistance to the bone (they cut about $700 million out of their budget). President Ford vetoed this bill, but the Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate and they overrode Ford’s veto.

The North Vietnames saw the writing on the wall and saw that the U.S. would not come to the aid of South Vietnam, even though the U.S. was legally and morally required to do so. And they were right. They attacked again in 1975, and the Democrats washed their hands of South Vietnam, and the South Vietnamese lost hope and turned and ran, and North Vietnam took over South Vietnam.

All because of Democrat stupidity, cluelessnes, and FEAR of confronting dictators.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 4:29 am

Iraq:

There was a lot of tough fighting in Iraq, but eventually George W. Bush got the situation settled down, and the Iraqi people were voting for the first time in their lives and they were happy and opening up shops and doing entrepreneurial things left and right. Life was good!

Then Obama and Biden got elected, and they turned Iraq over to the Iranian militia and that’s when this nationbuilding exercise went wrong.

Afghanistan:

Afghanistan, although not under complete control, was settled down for most of the country when Trump was in charge. No Americans were killed by the Taliban in 18 months after Trump told the Taliban leader he knew where his house was located.

Then Joe Biden took charge in Afghanistan and things went promptly to Hell. Joe Biden was one of the Radical Democrats who sold South Vietnam down the river and 50 years later, he is selling Afghanistan down the river.

So you see, the problem is not Forever Wars or Nationbuilding. The problems begin when Democrats are put in charge.

Righwing Isolationists should be worrying about Democrats being in control, not Nationbuilding. They have learned the wrong lessons from history. Those who forget the lessons of history (or never learned them in the first place) are destined to repeat history.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:10 am

Lunacy in full flight. Total slop post.

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 5:59 am

Wow, I’m impressed with your debating skills.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 7, 2026 10:28 am

You dont ‘debate’ a moron.
Slop stinks..

MarkW
Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 9:58 am

Translation: I can’t refute any thing in this post, so instead I’ll just fling juvenile insults.

Reply to  MarkW
January 7, 2026 10:30 am

Mafia stinks. Gangsters suck. Bling distracts..

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:46 am

Although we cannot blame the Republican Party or GW Bush for 911, we can blame them for invading the wrong country.

Nothing the Democrats did was more costly than thinking Iraq was anything to do with Al Qaeda.

The Forever Wars are a result of Imperialism, not any particular party.

MarkW
Reply to  MCourtney
January 7, 2026 9:59 am

This is one of the big lies of the left.
Iraq was not invaded because of 911, the Gulf war was restarted because Saddam was refusing to live up to his side of the cease fire.

Reply to  MarkW
January 7, 2026 10:33 am

Slop..

Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 1:59 pm

BN can’t handle the truth !!

Reply to  MarkW
January 7, 2026 10:38 am

Very funny. 911 was the calling call for every american asshole with power to start hammering.
Basically the Wolfowitz doctrine. Stacked on top of the lie that the US lost in Vietnam because of commie tendencies at home. In their eyes the US never loses anything. It is always someone else’s fault. Pretty much sums up Trump and his supporters. Slop..

Reply to  MCourtney
January 7, 2026 10:33 am

Indeed. That is something the Trumpers never seem to get. Trump is the uber Imperialist. And that’s unamerican.
Neo colonialist tendencies ever since Roosevelt died. It has been ugly ever since.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  ballynally
January 7, 2026 12:13 pm

So goes your opinion based on your perceptions and beliefs.

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
January 7, 2026 2:01 pm

Those beliefs seem to be rooted deeply in socialist/marxist/Democrat ideologies. And driven by the mental disease referred to as TDS. !

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:58 am

“No Americans were killed by the Taliban in 18 months after Trump told the Taliban leader he knew where his house was located.”

I love that. Classic Trump. Machiavellian, sure- but it works!

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:49 am

All because of American stupidity and cluelessness, Period. GOP/Democrat both.

USA simply doesn’t do long term foreign policy.

MarkW
Reply to  Leo Smith
January 7, 2026 10:00 am

Democrats don’t do long term foreign policy.

Reply to  Leo Smith
January 7, 2026 10:41 am

But they DO. Deep state policy since the death of FDR. Regime change. Venezuela is just the latest.
Indonesia, Chile, Guatemala, Libya, Syria. The list is long.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Leo Smith
January 7, 2026 12:14 pm

I have to give that an upvote.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 5:56 am

Forever war fear? How about a 2 hour non war that accomplished far more than most wars. I listened to NPR the other day- crying over this 2 hour non war.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 7, 2026 8:36 am

“A war that could have been concluded in a matter of months took over ten years to complete.”

And less than a week to lose.

January 7, 2026 5:26 am

Anyone who thinks this will all go according to plan needs their head examined.

No oil company is going to invest in a mafia state even if another mafia state has just kidnapped its don.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Leo Smith
January 7, 2026 8:41 am

They will if it is clear it will be profitable, even if short term.

The oil companies are owed billions by Venezuela. Even if no profits, recouping some of that debt could be sufficient motivation.

Bruce Cobb
January 7, 2026 5:28 am

This looks to be a win for both the US and Venezuela. The only losers will be the Climate Ideologues. Cue the onslaught of screaming, crying, and binge-whining.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
January 7, 2026 6:07 am

They are already crying with oil deals being struck.

January 7, 2026 5:59 am
  1. The charts should have used semi log formatting.
  2. A Ryder Scott reserves “audit” is use free in this context. There are no SEC* constraints and most of these auditors (including RS) are in competition with each other. A recipe or a “What do you want it to be” audit.
  3. I can not find a national oil cut v oil cum plot, but if those for the major fields are indicative (they are probably better than for the rest of the fields) then the future of V oil production is for beam lifting mostly water with a sticky skim of sour road tar, while valiantly, futilely pumping diluent down the back side. Trended to become uneconomic after a tiny fraction of this aspirational 300BBOE now being bandied about.

All the political/marketing problems are undermined by these simple, petroleum engineering facts of life. Ignore V, it’s a nothing burger. Worry about the plethora of other 47 made problems.

*Complain about SEC reserve runs as you wish. They aren’t those used by the business. They serve to normalize reserves between fields and over time. They are the best tool available for that.

January 7, 2026 8:05 am

Venezuela is estimated to have 303 billion barrels of crude oil reserves as of 2023, 17% of proven world reserves.

I keep seeing this 303 billion barrels figure, but I am skeptical. Who has “proven” this figure?

Reply to  Paul Hurley
January 7, 2026 9:09 am

Ryder Scott. Without SEC type process safeguards, RS will say whatever Yugo aksed them to. RS is not any worse than the others, but they serve whoever pays them.

Reserves determination will be a quickly changing process, even without multiple hands up the evaluators dress. And with political changes and 47’s Sudafed snorting 2AM changes of mind, the investment climate will change Bigly, Monthly. But in any case, you can count on those “reserves” being a small fraction of 300BBOE pimped so far, even with US “help” and continued Ben Dover environmental, safety, health regard.

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 7, 2026 9:10 am

“will say” s/b “said”

KevinM
January 7, 2026 9:43 am

There may need to be a significant investment before production growth can be achieved

That’d be a risky investment: Buying and installing all kinds of high-capital-cost, long-term-revenue-generating equipment today to see the next Venezuelan political movement nationalize it tomorrow.

January 7, 2026 10:49 am

Lipstick on a pig. Is American/Isruli corruption any better than Venezuela corruption?

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  whsmith@wustl.edu
January 7, 2026 12:16 pm

Yes. Anything American is always the best. 😉

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  whsmith@wustl.edu
January 7, 2026 5:15 pm

Considering both the American and Israeli economies, as compared to Venezuela, I would say definitely yes.