• Oct. 11, 2025, 8:00 AM EDTBy Alicia Victoria…
  • Palestinians Begin Return Home As Ceasefire Takes Effect
  • Oct. 11, 2025, 8:48 AM EDT / Updated Oct. 11, 2025,…
  • Inside the scramble to save lives as deadly…

Be that!

contact@bethat.ne.com

 

Be That ! Menu   ≡ ╳
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics Politics
☰

Be that!

What OPEC’s surprise oil cut means for US gas prices

admin - Latest News - September 22, 2025
admin
13 views 3 mins 0 Comments




New York
CNN
 — 

OPEC and its allies’ surprise move to slash oil production will soon be felt at US gas pumps.

The group known as OPEC+ announced Sunday it would cut oil production by more than 1.6 million barrels a day starting in May, running through the end of the year. The news sent both Brent crude futures, the global oil benchmark, and WTI, the US benchmark, up about 6% in trading Monday.

The production cut announcement also had an immediate impact on gasoline futures, which will be passed onto US drivers much more quickly than the spike in oil prices. RBOB, the most closely watched wholesale gasoline price, was up about 8 cents a gallon, or about 3%, in morning trading.

“I think OPEC is reawakening the inflation monster,” said Tom Kloza, global head of energy analysis for OPIS, which tracks gas prices for AAA. “The White House has to be shocked and major-time pissed. It certainly alters the calculus for a while.”

The national average for US gas prices stood at $3.51, on Monday, according to AAA. Kloza said he could see it getting up to $3.80 to $3.90 in relatively short order thanks to the move by OPEC.

“We’re not going to get back to $5 a gallon. I don’t think we’re even going as high as $4,” he said. But he said by the end of the summer US drivers could be back above year-earlier prices, especially if there is a hurricane or other storms affecting production along the Gulf Coast.

The average US regular gas price a year ago stood at $4.19 a gallon in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the disruption that caused to world’s energy markets. Prices eventually reached a record $5.02 a gallon on June 14, before starting a slow but steady decline over the course of more than three months during which the average price fell every day. The decline was partly driven by the release of oil from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and partly by concerns that there could be a US or global recession that reduced the demand for gasoline.

Even at $3.51, US gas prices were just below the $3.53 average on Feb. 23, 2022, the day before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Kloza said one thing keeping prices from getting anywhere near the record levels of 2022 is that the US plans additional releases from the SPR, and US oil production and refining capacity are both up. But a cut of 1 million barrels a day of oil by OPEC+ will not be easy to make up.

“They have ability to cut production and they seem motivated to do so,” he said.



Source link

TAGS:
PREVIOUS
Micron Technology: China probes US chip maker for cybersecurity risks as tech tension escalates
NEXT
Video shows moment of deadly explosion at cafe in Russia
Related Post
September 24, 2025
Sept. 24, 2025, 3:47 PM EDTBy Tyler KingkadeAfter dozens of school districts and colleges fired employees or placed them on leave over social media posts about Charlie Kirk’s assassination, some of those employees are turning to federal courts to get their jobs back. A former Ball State University staff member is suing the Indiana school’s president after she was fired for posting on Facebook: “Charlie Kirk’s death is a reflection of the violence, fear and hatred he sowed. It does not excuse his death, AND it’s a sad truth.”An art teacher in central Iowa filed a suit last week after the Oskaloosa school board voted to fire him for posting “1 Nazi down” about Kirk’s assassination.An elementary school teacher assistant is suing her Spartanburg County, South Carolina, district over what her lawsuit calls an unconstitutional social media policy. According to the suit, she was fired for posting a quote from Kirk in which he said it’s worth having “some gun deaths every single year” to protect the Second Amendment, and then adding the phrase “thoughts and prayers.” And on Wednesday, an art professor will plead his case before a federal judge in Sioux Falls, hoping to stop the University of South Dakota from firing him for posting on Facebook: “Where was all this concern when the politicians in Minnesota were shot? And the school shootings? And capital police? I have no thoughts or prayers for this hate spreading nazi. A shrug, maybe.”The schools have not yet responded in court. The universities and two districts declined to comment on pending litigation.The lawsuits are among the first actions educators have taken to combat a campaign propelled by conservative influencers and Republican lawmakers who urged schools and other employers to fire people who they say made light of or celebrated Kirk’s death. Those pushing for the firings have argued that teachers and professors with abhorrent views shouldn’t be allowed to influence students. Liberal-leaning critics have accused conservatives of embracing so-called cancel culture, which they had long condemned. Death of Charlie Kirk raises questions about future of free speech in America02:00Civil liberties groups have warned that some of the firings could violate the First Amendment, regardless of whether they simply criticize Kirk or openly celebrate his death. The legal challenges filed over the past two weeks will be important test cases on whether public employees can post statements deemed offensive, said Adam Goldstein, vice president of strategic initiatives at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.“It’s an unfortunate necessity that the courts will have to weigh in here,” Goldstein said. “There’s no option here other than a number of cases where courts hopefully reinstruct us on how the First Amendment is supposed to work.”In the days after Kirk was shot earlier this month, Vice President JD Vance and other top Republicans urged citizens to report people who mock Kirk’s assassination to their employers. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon told Fox News last week that she’d “like to see more” college faculty who celebrate Kirk’s death fired or suspended.Some Democrats have shared similar sentiments. In Iowa, a leading Democratic gubernatorial candidate echoed calls to remove the Oskaloosa teacher. “I’d be pretty uncomfortable with my kids having teachers that celebrated someone’s murder,” Rob Sand, the candidate and current state auditor, told the Des Moines Register this week. Because the cases involve public employees, the employers have a higher bar to meet before firing them for speaking out, legal experts say. They will have to show the staff members’ posts created a disruption that interfered with classes, for instance, or the operation of a school. Goldstein said generating controversy or complaints is typically not enough to warrant a firing. Michael Hook, the University of South Dakota art professor, deleted his remarks after a few hours, and shared an apology that stated he regretted the original post. Through his lawyer, Hook declined to be interviewed.Hook filed a motion Tuesday to get an emergency order to block the university from moving forward with the next step in his termination process. He alleges his firing stems from angering “the wrong people,” noting that the governor and speaker of the state house had called for his termination. “When I read this post, I was shaking mad,” Gov. Larry Rhoden, a Republican, posted on X.An online petition to reinstate Hook has over 8,000 signatures.In many cases, Goldstein said, the teachers’ punishment seems disproportionate to their alleged offense, noting that an inappropriate post could be flagged without termination.“It’s very weird to live in a world where Charlie’s wife can forgive the shooter,” Goldstein said, “but we can’t forgive a teacher who quoted him.”Tyler KingkadeTyler Kingkade is a national reporter for NBC News, based in Los Angeles.
September 22, 2025
Sept. 22, 2025, 8:04 AM EDT / Updated Sept. 22, 2025, 11:58 AM EDTBy Freddie ClaytonDrones over Poland. Fighter jets above Estonia. Surveillance planes over the Baltic Sea.To U.S. allies in Europe, the pattern is unmistakable: A deliberate campaign of escalation from the Kremlin, designed to probe NATO’s defenses and political resolve. The question hanging over an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council on Monday is how exactly the alliance will respond.As NATO struggles to turn alarm into action, officials and analysts urged a more forceful response and warned that hesitation risks emboldening Russian President Vladimir Putin. But questions about U.S. support, escalation risks and what this growing threat means for Ukraine remain unresolved. Estonia, which called for the Security Council meeting after three Russian MiG-31 fighter aircraft entered its airspace for 12 minutes without permission last week, pressed members to address what it described as a “blatant, reckless, and flagrant violation of NATO airspace” and Russia’s “repeated violations of international law.”Russia’s actions “undermine principles vital to the security of all U.N. member states,” Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna said Sunday in a post on X. Claims that Russia violated Estonian airspace were “baseless” and “aimed at escalating tensions,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Monday, adding that Russia operated within international regulations. So far, NATO’s response has largely been limited to meeting rooms as Moscow’s probing exposes a contrast between European leaders’ urgent calls for action and President Donald Trump’s more muted response.A Russian MiG-31 fighter jet that took part in the violation of Estonian airspace, in a photo released by the Swedish armed forces.Swedish Armed Forces / via ReutersAsked by reporters Sunday whether Washington would come to the defense of Poland and the Baltic states if Russia attacks, Trump said: “Yeah I would.”And on Monday Mike Walz, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations told the Security Council meeting that the events left “the impression either Russia wants to escalate or doesn’t have full control of its fighter planes and drones.” Either scenario, he said, was “very disconcerting.” The U.S. “will defend every inch of NATO territory,” he said, adding that he expected “Russia to seek ways to de escalate, not risk expansion.” At the same meeting, Britain’s Foreign Minister Yvette Cooper also warned that Russia’s incursions into NATO territory risked triggering an armed conflict. “Your reckless actions risk direct armed confrontation between NATO and Russia. Our alliance is defensive but be under no illusion we stand ready to defend NATO’s skies and NATO’s territory,” she said. “If we need to confront planes operating in NATO space without permission then we will do so,” she added. This drew an immediate rebuke from Moscow, which dismissed Europe’s concerns as groundless and hysterical.NATO’s response to this ratcheting Russian activity amounts to the launch of operation “Eastern Sentry” earlier this month to bolster the defense of Europe’s eastern flank in response to a series of Russian drone incursions over Poland. After Germany and Sweden scrambled fighter jets Sunday to intercept and track a Russian surveillance plane flying unidentified over the Baltic Sea, one regional leader said Russia was not just testing NATO’s response, but was also aiming to reduce support for Ukraine by compelling countries to redirect resources.Calibrating how to respond to Russia was not easy, Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics said on social media, adding that Russia was doing just enough not to cross a red line.European confidence about backing from Washington has been shaken by Ukraine, where Trump has so far stopped short of imposing his promised punishment of further sanctions on the Kremlin for refusing peace talks. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that he was preparing for an “intense week” at the U.N. General Assembly in New York, where he hopes to build support for efforts to stop Russia’s invasion.Ukraine has also submitted a request to attend the Security Council meeting and present its position.The aftermath of a Russian missile attack Saturday, in Dnipro, Ukraine. Denys Poliakov / Global Images Ukraine via Getty ImagesBut Europe’s security will require decisive action, and that will not happen at a Security Council meeting, “for the very simple reason that Russia has a veto on the council,” said Keir Giles, a senior fellow at Chatham House, a London-based think tankUnable to rely on Trump’s “shifting position” on Russia, Giles told NBC News, the “coalition of the willing” — European nations that say they are prepared to underwrite security guarantees for Ukraine — must become the “coalition of the able and actually doing something.”Poland will not hesitate to shoot down objects that violate its airspace and pose a threat, its prime minister said Monday. But, he said, his country would take a more cautious approach when dealing with situations that are less clear-cut, and would need to know it had its allies’ support.”You really need to think twice before deciding on actions that could trigger a very acute phase of conflict,” Donald Tusk told a news conference.Trump met with Putin in Alaska but his peace push in Ukraine has stalled.Kevin Lamarque / ReutersHesitation, analysts said, risks sending a dangerous signal.“Europe and NATO have to show the will to respond forcefully to Russia,” said Moritz Brake, a senior fellow at the Center for Advanced Security, Strategic and Integration Studies.“Russia is trying to gauge whether it’s possible to single out individual elements of the alliance,” he said in a phone interview. A forceful approach, Brake argued, would involve not just intercepting Russian aircraft, but also sending “manned fighter jets” that could shoot Russian jets down “at any minute.” As an example, he pointed to 2015, when NATO member Turkey shot down a Russian warplane seconds after it violated the country’s airspace near the Syrian border. Moscow did not retaliate militarily. “Russia didn’t declare war on Turkey,” Brake said. “Wavering is much more dangerous than a forceful approach.”Freddie ClaytonFreddie Clayton is a freelance journalist based in London. Abigail Williams contributed.
October 10, 2025
Speaker Johnson talks delay swearing of Grijalva
September 21, 2025
Former Trump lawyer compares Trump to Putin
Comments are closed.
Scroll To Top
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics
© Copyright 2025 - Be That ! . All Rights Reserved