China's surplus crude oil surges in June, giving refiners options
China's surplus crude amounted to 1.42 million barrels per day (bpd) in June, up from 1.40 million bpd in May and the fourth straight month above the 1 million bpd level, according to calculations based on official data.
For the first half of 2025 China's surplus crude amounted to 1.06 million bpd, as strong second quarter oil imports overcame a soft start to the year.
The volume of crude flowing into inventories gives Chinese refiners options in coming months, as they can choose to trim imports if they deem that oil prices have risen too quickly as a result of the Israel-Iran conflict last month.
China does not disclose the volumes of crude flowing into or out of strategic and commercial stockpiles, but an estimate can be made by deducting the amount of oil processed from the total of crude available from imports and domestic output.
Refiners processed 15.15 million bpd in June, according to Reuters calculations based on official data released on Tuesday, up 8.8% from May and the highest rate since September 2023.
The world's largest importer of crude oil saw arrivals of 12.14 million bpd in June, the highest daily rate since August 2023, and up 7.1% from May.
Domestic oil production was 4.43 million bpd in June, up from 4.35 million bpd in May.
Putting June imports and domestic output together gives a total of 16.57 million bpd of crude available to refiners, leaving a surplus of 1.42 million bpd once refinery throughput of 15.15 million bpd is subtracted.
It is worth noting that not all of this surplus crude is likely to have been added to storage, with some being processed in plants not captured by the official data.
But even allowing for gaps in the official data, it is clear that from March onwards China has been importing crude at a far higher rate than it needs to meet its domestic fuel requirements.
China has built up a track record of importing more crude than it needs when it believes prices are low, but pulling back when prices rise.
The surge in imports in the second quarter came against a backdrop of declining crude prices when the cargoes would have been arranged.
Global benchmark Brent futures dropped from a high of $75.47 a barrel on April 2 to a four-year low of $58.50 on May 5, a period during which cargoes that arrived in the second quarter would have been secured.
Conversely, China's soft crude imports in the first quarter came after prices were rising during the window when those cargoes would have been bought.
Brent went from a low of $70.85 a barrel on December 6 to a six-month high of $82.63 on January 15, meaning China's refiners were facing rising import costs for cargoes arriving in the first quarter.
Brent prices have been volatile in recent weeks amid the brief conflict between Israel and Iran in June, which was later joined by the United States.
Brent reached a six-month high of $81.40 a barrel on June 23 and has since moderated to end at $68.71 on Tuesday, as concern mounts over the global economic impact of the higher import tariffs promised by U.S. President Donald Trump.
This volatility may result in China's refiners easing back on import volumes in August and September, but much still depends on whether the June spike remains a brief blip higher amid an overall declining price trend.
Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X, opens new tab.
The views expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
.jpeg%3Fwidth%3D1200%26auto%3Dwebp%26quality%3D75%26crop%3D3%3A2%2Csmart%26trim%3D&w=3840&q=100)
Scotsman
19 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Realising the benefits of investing to achieve long-term goals
Tom Ham | Supplied Tom Ham, Group CEO at Calton, on moves to incentivise Cash ISA savers to go into investment Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Well, the UK Government is rushing to get everything off its desk in a mad scramble to get out the door for the summer holiday. The long-awaited draft legislation on Inheritance Tax changes for pensions and agricultural and business property has been released. Spoiler – neither are going away, so more on the technicalities of these soon. More exciting, however, is the new stuff being lobbed over the transom. There's the Pensions Commission, and a raft of reforms designed to funnel money out of cash savings and into investments. Here's some context to help separate the signal from the noise. The government is looking for growth and to inject capital into the UK markets. Fund flows into London-listed mandates have been declining for months, and new listings in the UK's IPO space have dropped to their lowest level for a half-year since records began in 1995. No-one wants to use the word bleak at midsummer, but this does not signal health or confidence. At the same time, global trends in personal finance show that people are holding a significant proportion of their wealth in cash. Vanguard reports this month that an estimated £1.7 trillion is sitting in cash savings across the OECD; the same report suggested that in the UK there is potentially £242 billion that could be turned towards both the government's and individual citizens' long-term financial goals. Do the markets have a right to people's money? Of course not. But we should ask why and how we might nudge this cash into investment and consider who might benefit. The savings cash-pile has accumulated because of policy, regulation and broad economic patterns on one hand, and financial education and behaviour on the other. Cynics might say the government has just identified a new reservoir of money to tap. Banks and building societies have pointed out that this money isn't inactive, it circulates through their lending activities too. That said, the Treasury has two motives for seeking to turn savers' money towards the market. First, the government – and surely everyone else – wants to reinvigorate the economy, to foster growth and instil confidence, though the jury is out on how much this will move the dial. Second, individuals holding money in cash accounts are not getting the same long-term return they might realise if they invested instead. This is a problem as personal savings, and taking responsibility for maximising them, become increasingly important as public finances deteriorate and defined contribution pensions are now the norm. To be clear, holding assets in cash isn't intrinsically bad – we frequently advise clients to do so. Your emergency fund of three to six months of living expenses needs to be in an easy-access account. As clients approach retirement, we increase the amount they hold in cash – often within pension or other investment wrappers – to protect from market events as they approach drawdown or the purchase of an annuity. At this stage we suggest having 12-18 months of living expenses available – not a small amount of money. But the Cash ISA is a subject of speculation. They are vastly popular because they are useful for short-term saving goals – easy to set up, easy to withdraw from, and a low-risk tax-wrapper shielding profits from Income Tax and Capital Gains Tax. If changes come, they will be to the annual tax-free allowance. Since ISAs arrived in 1999 the allowance for adult account holders has risen from £4,000 per annum to a grand £20,000. This can be shared amongst all members of the ISA family – the Stocks and Shares ISA, the Lifetime ISA and the Finance ISA, each with different rules, risks and rates of return. The most straightforward change to divert savings towards investment would be to reallocate the allowance across other types of ISA, stipulating a certain portion must go to an Investment ISA. However, this is when you slam into the two major barriers to investment – risk and cost. For example, opening a Stocks and Shares ISA involves declaring your awareness of the risk, being comfortable with it, and paying a percentage fee to your ISA provider. While you can make withdrawals from a Stocks and Shares ISA instantly, exposure to market falls means you are more likely to realise expected returns over a longer period – most experts advise a minimum five-year investment, but this is the kind of decision you might wish to seek more reassurance and advice on. So far, the Cash ISA remains untouched; it's now incumbent upon government and the advice profession to make the case for investment to help people with their long-term goals, and to show the benefits rather than be accused of making another cash grab.
Reuters
19 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK's Cranswick's revenue rises on healthy demand for premium meat
July 28 (Reuters) - British meat producer Cranswick (CWK.L), opens new tab reported 7.9% growth in first-quarter like-for-like revenue on Monday, supported by resilient consumer demand for premium ranges as well as new business wins. The company, which supplies fresh pork, sausages, and bacon to supermarkets across Britain and exports to China, said premium meats continued to outperform as consumer appetite for natural protein, that derived from unprocessed sources like meat, is increasing. Cranswick has been expanding its operations across the pig production chain with recent acquisitions including sausage manufacturer Blakemans and UK pig genetics firm JSR Genetics . The company reported a 9.7% growth in reported revenue, partly helped by Blakemans' integration. The East Yorkshire based company has been ramping up capital spending to boost capacity, across its sites and said it has committed an additional 14 million pounds ($18.78 million) to expand output and product range at its Lincoln pet food facility. For the full year ending March 28, Cranswick expects to report adjusted pre-tax profit in line with market expectations of between 206.5 million pounds and 213.6 million pounds, according to a company compiled poll. ($1 = 0.7457 pounds)
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Australia won't receive Aukus nuclear submarines unless US doubles shipbuilding, admiral warns
The US cannot sell any Virginia-class nuclear submarines to Australia without doubling its production rate, because it is making too few for its own defence, the navy's nominee for chief of operations has told Congress. There are 'no magic beans' to boosting the US's sclerotic shipbuilding capacity, Admiral Daryl Caudle said in frank evidence before a Senate committee. The US's submarine fleet numbers are a quarter below their target, US government figures show, and the country is producing boats at just over half the rate it needs to service its own defence requirements. Testifying before the Senate Committee on Armed Services as part of his confirmation process to serve as the next chief of naval operations, Caudle lauded Royal Australian Navy sailors as 'incredible submariners', but said the US would not be able to sell them any boats – as committed under the Aukus pact – without a '100% improvement' on shipbuilding rates. The US Navy estimates it needs to be building Virginia-class submarines at a rate of 2.00 a year to meet its own defence requirements, and about 2.33 to have enough boats to sell any to Australia. It is currently building Virginia-class submarines at a rate of about 1.13 a year, senior admirals say. 'Australia's ability to conduct undersea warfare is not in question,' Caudle said, 'but as you know the delivery pace is not what it needs to be to make good on the pillar one of the Aukus agreement which is currently under review by our defence department'. Caudle said efficiency gains or marginal improvements would not be sufficient to 'make good on the actual pact that we made with the UK and Australia, which is … around 2.2 to 2.3 Virginia-class submarines per year'. 'That is going to require a transformational improvement; not a 10% improvement, not a 20% improvement but a 100% improvement,' he said. Sign up: AU Breaking News email Under pillar one of the Aukus agreement, Australia is scheduled to buy between three and five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the US, starting in 2032. The UK will build the first Aukus-class submarine for its navy by 'the late 2030s'. The first Australian-built Aukus boat will be in the water 'in the early 2040s'. Aukus is forecast to cost Australia up to $368bn over 30 years. US goodwill towards Australia, or the import of the US-alliance, would be irrelevant to any decision to sell submarines: Aukus legislation prohibits the US selling Australia any submarine if that would weaken US naval strength. Australia has already paid $1.6bn out of an expected total of $4.7bn (US$3bn) to help the US boost its flagging shipbuilding industry. But the US itself has been pouring money into its shipbuilding yards, without noticeable effect. A joint statement on 'the state of nuclear shipbuilding' issued by three rear admirals in April noted that while Congress had committed an additional US$5.7bn to lift wages and shipyard productivity, 'we have not observed the needed and expected ramp-up in Columbia-class and Virginia-class submarine production rates necessary'. Caudle, himself a career submariner, said the US would need 'creativity, ingenuity, and some outsourcing improvements' if it were to meet its shipbuilding demands and produce 2.3 Virginia-class vessels a year. 'There are no magic beans to that,' he told the Senate hearing. 'There's nothing that's just going to make that happen. So the solution space has got to open up.' The former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, who first reported on Caudle's testimony to the Senate, told the Guardian that there was 'no shortage of goodwill towards Australia' from the US in relation to Aukus, but the realities of a shortfall of submarines meant there was a 'very, very high' probability that Virginia-class submarines would never arrive under Australian control. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Turnbull said the language coming from US naval experts was 'framing expectations realistically', essentially saying that, without dramatic reform, the US could not sell any of its Virginia-class boats. With the Collins class nearing the end of their service lives, and the Aukus submarine design and build facing delays in the UK, Australia could be left without any submarine capability for a decade, potentially two, Turnbull argued. 'The risk of us not getting any Virginia-class submarines is – objectively – very, very high. The real question is why is the government not acknowledging that … and why is there no plan B? What are they doing to acquire alternative capabilities in the event of the Virginias not arriving?' Turnbull – who, as prime minister, had signed the diesel-electric submarine deal with French giant Naval that was unilaterally abandoned in favour of the Aukus agreement in 2021 – argued the Australian government, parliament and media had failed to properly interrogate the Aukus deal. 'When you compare the candour and the detail of the disclosure that the US Congress gets from the Department of the Navy, and the fluff we get here, it's a disgrace. Our parliament has the most at stake, but is the least curious, and the least informed. On Friday, the defence minister, Richard Marles, told reporters in Sydney 'work on Aukus continues apace'. 'We continue to work very closely … with the United States in progressing the optimal pathway to Australia acquiring a nuclear-powered submarine capability,' he said. 'In respect of the production and maintenance schedule in the United States, we continue to make our financial contributions to that industrial base.' Marles cited the $1.6bn paid to the US to boost its shipbuilding industry already this year, with further payments to come, and said that 120 Australian tradespeople were currently working on sustaining Virginia-class submarines in Pearl Harbor. 'All of that work continues and we are really confident that the production rates will be raised in America, which is very much part of the ambition of Aukus.' The Guardian put a series of questions to Marles's office about Caudle's Senate testimony.
