EU’s oil ban: if market friction is low, so is the pain for Russia - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
FT商学院

EU’s oil ban: if market friction is low, so is the pain for Russia

The bloc’s agreed partial embargo may prove to be ineffective as higher prices could compensate for reduced volumes

The aim of economic warfare is to inflict maximum pain at minimum cost. Achieving that is hard when the target is a key commodity producer. The EU’s agreement to ban most Russian oil imports reflects justified outrage at the barbaric invasion of Ukraine. But it may prove to be ineffective.

The problem with oil is that it is traded internationally. Higher prices may compensate Russia for reduced volumes, as US Treasury secretary Janet Yellen argued in April. Equally, customers in the EU and outside it may swap sources of supply in response to price signals, with little ultimate impact on the Russian exchequer.

The lower the level of substitution, the more powerful the partial embargo. Some countries, for example, lack refineries that can process Urals, Russia’s sulphurous main export blend.

That is not a problem for China and India. They have already moved to fill the gap in demand for Russian oil created by self-sanctioning by European refiners and traders. India rarely bought Russian oil in the past. But it emerged as the largest purchaser of Russian Urals crude in April, according to S&P Global.

Asian countries may not take up the full slack in demand for Russian oil, however, fearing retaliatory western sanctions. Capital Economics thinks Russia’s oil exports will fall by a fifth this year, even allowing for a 15 per cent rise in exports to non-western countries. But after factoring in higher prices, the consultancy estimates that Russia’s oil export revenues will be $180bn, a mere $2bn lower than in 2021.

The gap between Brent and Urals crude — currently $31 — may eventually fall in response to substitution. One response from the west may be to ban its insurers from covering tankers carrying Russian oil. Creating friction of a logistical kind is one way of compensating for a lack of it in markets.

Even after the oil embargo is fully phased in next year, it may be more than offset by higher gas prices. The oil embargo reduces Europe’s financial complicity. It will not, by itself, sabotage the Russian war machine.

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

欧洲病夫?德国企业老板针对高病假率发出警告

一项研究称,如果不是因为病假率高于平均水平,德国经济去年将增长0.5%,而非收缩0.3%。

朝鲜向俄派兵后,韩国考虑直接援乌武器

韩国认为,朝鲜向俄派兵和可能的俄朝技术转让对韩国的安全构成直接威胁。

再次陷入危机的大众汽车能走上改革之路吗?

欧洲最大的汽车制造商正与工人和政界人士交战,试图渡过痛苦的电动汽车转型期。

哈里斯的另一个大选对手:通货膨胀

美国选民对高昂生活成本的不满可能决定下周谁将赢得白宫。

Lex专栏:Meta和微软通过季度理智检查

科技巨头今天吹捧真正的胜利,以证明明天的巨额投资是合理的。投资者对此是支持的,但程度有限。

FT社评:英国工党预算——雄心勃勃,前景不明

财政大臣蕾切尔•里夫斯现在必须兑现她的投资计划,否则税收还将进一步增加。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×