US sanctions strain Russia's oil exports as shipping costs surge, Bloomberg reports
Russia is facing a significant oil transportation crisis due to recent U.S. sanctions, according to Bloomberg oil strategist Julian Lee.
On Jan. 10, the U.S. Treasury sanctioned 161 oil tankers involved in transporting Russian crude, adding to a series of measures imposed by the Biden administration. These restrictions, which President Donald Trump has yet to relax, have already caused a sharp increase in shipping costs for Russian oil exports.
The impact of these sanctions is evident in the rising cost of securing tankers to transport Russia's Urals crude to Asia. Data from Argus Media shows a nearly 50% surge in freight rates since the measures took effect. The difference between the price of Russian oil at export and its delivered price in Asia—an indicator of shipping costs—has also spiked.
The number of sanctioned vessels has now reached 265, with U.S. blacklisting proving to be the most disruptive. Of the 435 ships that transported Russian crude in 2024, 112—or 26%—are now under Washington's sanctions, according to Bloomberg.
When vessels sanctioned by the EU and U.K. are included, the figure rises to 37%. However, given that 80% of these tankers carried multiple shipments, the affected vessels were responsible for 57% of Russia's total seaborne crude exports last year. This presents a significant logistical hurdle for the Kremlin as it struggles to secure alternative shipping options.
The growing restrictions on Russia's so-called "shadow fleet" mean the country must find new ways to sustain its oil export volumes. Some sanctioned ships have already encountered delays, either idling near Russian ports or waiting outside Chinese terminals instead of completing deliveries. Others have been used to transfer cargo to larger storage vessels near Russia's coastline.
Freight costs have already surged, with the expense of shipping a barrel of Russian crude from the Black Sea to India now at $10, while transport from the Baltic costs as much as $13 per barrel. While these rates are not yet at the peak levels seen after the initial G7 price cap, they have jumped by 48% since Jan. 10.
With Russian oil shipments becoming increasingly difficult, the country's ability to maintain its export levels may come under serious strain. If the recent shipping bottlenecks continue to expand, the sanctions could deal a severe blow to Russia's energy trade, exacerbating its economic challenges.
Read also: Russian oil sales to China and India stall as sanctions increase costs, Reuters reports
We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's How CBDC Fears Are Fueling Bitcoin's Surge
Chatter about state-run digital money is nudging capital toward Bitcoin. China is extensively testing digital currencies, whereas the U.S. is not. Investors betting on perpetual fear driving prices up should temper their expectations. 10 stocks we like better than Bitcoin › The Y2K bug never melted the global grid, yet the panic-buying of flashlights and canned beans in the last months of 1999 was very real. Today, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) could be playing a similar role in a different fear cycle. CBDCs are digital currencies issued and controlled by a central bank, combining the convenience of digital money with the potential for state oversight of transactions. Talk of state-issued, fully traceable (and controllable) digital money has some investors looking for a lifeboat, and the main beneficiary this time could be Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC). If you think a large and fearful capital flight to Bitcoin driven by CBDCs is improbable in the near term, you aren't wrong. Nonetheless, it's undeniable that a centralized and government-controlled digital currency could threaten financial privacy in a way that encourages certain investors to hold their funds in another form. There's already some evidence that at least a few people are buying Bitcoin for this reason. Let's dig in and understand this trend a bit more so that you'll be prepared if it continues to take off. China's recent push to expand its digital yuan pilot projects is both a technical experiment and a catalyst for Chinese investors seeking to safeguard their financial privacy by seeking alternative currencies like Bitcoin. It's also a good example of how capital can behave in a way that's beneficial to Bitcoin when central bankers start to posture regarding implementing CBDCs. On April 23, the People's Bank of China urged state-owned enterprises to prioritize using the yuan for cross-border payments; the digital yuan is likely going to be promoted next. That move sent a clear message: The Chinese government is accelerating control over money and its flows, thereby spurring underground over-the-counter (OTC) purchasing of Bitcoin in cities like Shenzhen and Shanghai as investors scrambled to move capital offshore. The dynamic echoes early 2023, when the start of one of China's digital yuan pilot programs coincided with a 72% surge in Bitcoin's price from January to April, reflecting a classic flight to a perceived safe asset. With around 94% of central banks now exploring CBDCs, according to data from the Bank of International Settlements, the same impulse that's driving Chinese investors to Bitcoin could very easily spread internationally. In the U.S., CBDC conversations are a mix of cautious exploration and staunch political resistance. The Federal Reserve's research into a digital dollar is ongoing. Yet on Capitol Hill, resistance is mounting. A bill reintroduced in late February seeks to bar the Fed from issuing a CBDC. Furthermore, President Donald Trump's executive order on Jan. 28 bans a "digital dollar" outright, but that could actually spur CBDCs in other countries, as they'll be free to establish any norms they prefer for the currency category. So, U.S. investors aren't exactly afraid of a new CBDC threatening their privacy or control over their funds. However, they could still capture the upside from investors in other countries buying Bitcoin to evade their nations' CBDCs. At the moment, capital flight into Bitcoin as a result of CBDCs is a trend that's just starting to pick up. Still, it's important to keep expectations in check here. Bitcoin probably can't ever replace fiat currencies completely, whether they're digitized or not. Bitcoin's supply is famously capped at 21 million coins. That scarcity can support price strength until the cows come home. But there are many technical hurdles to using Bitcoin as an actual currency rather than merely as a store of value. Everyday transactions are far too slow or too costly to be competitive with cash, even on throughput-specialized side chains like the Lightning network. So while the CBDC debate may push Bitcoin higher to the extent it persists and intensifies, don't expect a one-way rocket ride. Investors can count on a tailwind here as long as privacy fears persist. Still, there's no wholly new reason to invest in Bitcoin any more than you're already doing, unless you want to avoid using a CBDC in the future. Before you buy stock in Bitcoin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Bitcoin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $668,538!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $869,841!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 789% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Alex Carchidi has positions in Bitcoin. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Here's How CBDC Fears Are Fueling Bitcoin's Surge was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If Elon Musk's Wealth Was Evenly Distributed Across America, How Much Money Would Every Person Get?
We've seen the headlines that reveal how rich the world's top billionaires are — but it's hard to comprehend just how rich they are. Consider this: Let's say you had $1 billion in your bank account and had to spend $100,000 every day, for an entire year. After 365 days, you would still have $963,500,000 (nine hundred sixty-three million five hundred thousand). Discover More: Find Out: Over the last two decades, billionaires have ballooned their wealth to unparalleled levels. In 2005, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates ranked as the world's richest person, with a net worth of $46.5 billion, as reported by CNN. Today, that title belongs to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, whose net worth stands at $368 billion as of June 5, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Even when adjusted for inflation, Gates' former net worth would be equivalent to roughly $76 billion in today's dollars. It is worth noting that other billionaires have also increased their wealth during the same time. For instance, tech billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos are worth $229 billion and $227 billion, ranking second and third globally. For many Americans, this trend is not sitting well. The sky-high cost of living has catalyzed support for redistributive tax policies, especially among younger voters and the progressive base of the Democratic Party. While higher taxation may or may not happen in the years to come, here's hypothetically how much you'd get if the world's richest man gives a check to every American. The United States Census Bureau estimates the current population to be around 341 million people, ranking only behind India and China. If Musk's enormous $368 billion were equally divided in the U.S., each person would receive $1,079 (rounded to the nearest dollar). A couple would receive $2,158, while a family of four would get $4,316. Despite the enormous wealth of billionaires, much of their fortune is tied up in stocks, real estate, and other holdings. Only a small percentage of their assets is held in cash. Based on data from Forbes, Musk has a 12% ownership stake in Tesla and to date, he remains the largest shareholder in the $1.15 trillion electric vehicle company. This is in addition to a 42% slice in SpaceX and a 54% interest in xAI, among many other businesses. Interestingly, Bloomberg reported that Musk's financial holdings appreciated by 77% after joining the campaign trail with President Donald Trump late last year, as reported by Bloomberg. Investors became bullish on Tesla and Musk became the first person to ever reach a net worth exceeding $400 billion. Since then, Tesla's market value has fluctuated as a result of volatile market conditions, macroeconomic factors and the threat of a global trade war. Editor's note: Data is accurate as of June 5 and is subject to change. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Says Trump's Executive Order To Lower Medication Costs Has a 'Real Shot' -- Here's Why This article originally appeared on If Elon Musk's Wealth Was Evenly Distributed Across America, How Much Money Would Every Person Get?
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
3 Terrible Companies To Lose $5 Billion in Federal Green Energy Loans
In the last days of the Biden administration, the Energy Department dolled out billions of dollars for politically favored green energy projects. The Trump administration is looking to claw this funding back. The Energy Department is getting ready to "cancel seven major loans and loan guarantees that had been conditionally approved under the Biden administration," reports Semafor. This action will cancel approximately $5 billion worth of funding for a transmission project by a New Jersey utility company, a loan program for low-income homeowners to install rooftop solar panels by Sunnova, and a Monolith Nebraska factory to produce low-carbon ammonia. The remaining four projects, which collectively received over $3 billion, include three battery factories and a plastics and recycling facility, which "were already previously cancelled by their companies because of other various headwinds," according to Semafor. The three active projects that will have their federal loans axed have faced their own share of problems. In September 2023, Sunnova received a $3 billion partial loan guarantee from the Energy Department's Loan Programs Office (LPO) for Project Hestia—a program that would make residential rooftop solar, battery storage, and virtual power plants "available to more American homeowners." Hestia was expected to provide loans to as many as 115,000 homeowners in the United States and Puerto Rico for these technologies, while creating "3,400 good-paying, high-quality American jobs." After receiving the federal loan, Sunnova came under fire for its alleged history of predatory practices and scamming elderly clients, which led to subsequent congressional scrutiny. In April, Sunnova began filing for bankruptcy. The company recently said it was no longer planning to use the programming funding and was working with the Energy Department to return the remaining guarantees. Monolith received a $953 million conditional loan guarantee from the LPO to accelerate its clean hydrogen and carbon utilization project in Nebraska. The company, which has received backing from BlackRock and NextEra Energy and was valued at over $1 billion in 2022, creates hydrogen fuel with renewable energy (which can be used to make ammonia in fertilizers) and carbon black. Despite the federal funding and private sector support, The Wall Street Journal reported in September 2024 that the company was "running short on cash and facing project delays." The third project facing the ax is New Jersey's Clean Energy Corridor, "a project to upgrade and expand transmission infrastructure to accommodate planned generation in New Jersey to meet growing electricity demand." Run by Jersey Central Power & Light Company, the project received a conditional loan guarantee of up to $716 million in January to support the state's goal of "introducing 11,000 MW of offshore wind-generated electricity by 2035." When First Energy, which owns Jersey Central, first announced the project in 2022, Danish energy company Orsted was planning two large wind projects off New Jersey's coast. The projects were canceled in 2023. Another New Jersey offshore wind project was recently halted after the Environmental Protection Agency rescinded the project's environmental permits. Despite these project cancellations and the LPO's history of questionable and risky investments, it does not appear that the office is going away soon; Energy Secretary Chris Wright recently told lawmakers that his agency would use the LPO to advance nuclear energy projects. Assuming Wright fully cuts billions of dollars worth of wasteful projects and narrows the agency's scope to only fund nuclear power projects, it's possible that the LPO's budget—which ballooned to over $400 billion under the Biden administration—could meaningfully shrink. Still, a meaningfully reduced budget is not enough. With the national deficit climbing to over $28 trillion in debt held by the public, taxpayers can no longer afford to support the federal government's fantasy that it should be a green bank. The post 3 Terrible Companies To Lose $5 Billion in Federal Green Energy Loans appeared first on Sign in to access your portfolio
