this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2026
483 points (99.6% liked)

World News

51843 readers
2290 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump has asked for at least $100bn (£75bn) in oil industry spending for Venezuela, but received a lukewarm response at the White House as one executive warned the South American country was currently "uninvestable".

Bosses of the biggest US oil firms who attended the meeting acknowledged that Venezuela, sitting on vast energy reserves, represented an enticing opportunity.

But they said significant changes would be needed to make the region an attractive investment. No major financial commitments were immediately forthcoming.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 185 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Sure, invest $100bn into an unstable country chasing a dying technology at the behest of a corrupt regime. Even for oil companies, Venezuela is too hot to touch.

[–] ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 80 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Not to mention there's a solid chance the next president will basically dedicate their career to undoing Trump's BS, so there's no guarantee you'll get more than a few years of revenue.

[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

the next president will basically dedicate their career to undoing Trump’s BS

And don't forget half the time Trump undoes his own purported industrial policy.

With the tariffs he was so inconsistent and capricious, that nobody could rely on having an edge over foreign competition long term and so nobody would dare to invest in manufacturing in the USA. If he felt like it he just cut them off from their essential foreign inputs too. Not to mention how he threatened pulling back the CHIPS Act subsidies from Intel, or how he raided Hyundai.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago

A month from now:

I'm working on this horrible Venezuela situation that BIDEN left me with. Such a waste of American resources but I'm going to pull that back to make America great again.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Even if Trump hangs around as a dictator there's still no point investing in Venezuela. It's not as if there is even a global oil shortage so why would you want to build more infrastructure.

[–] bbboi@feddit.uk 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Trump is looking at fighting a war in Venezuela, Greenland and at home. How could anybody possibly think this regime is ever going to be anything near stable?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I've played enough Battlefield to know that a war in a oil field is nothing at short of spectacular.

[–] drdalek@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If we have another election at all

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Judging from the anger over ICE and anti-american administration if Trump tries to stop the election there will be riots and strikes.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I lost count of the many "if x happens we'll act" excuses…

[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 12 points 14 hours ago

Yeah America is a laughing stock around my local pub table.

[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have yet to see any evidence that Trump doing anything would cause riots and strikes. The American people are too pacified to defend themselves.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

We've already had a few riots.

Technically we've also had Jan 6th, but I know that's not what you mean.

[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 12 points 1 day ago

Unfortunately that doesnt change what @drdalek@lemmy.dbzer0.com is concerned about, specifically when we take the executive order that marks nonexistent organizations and basic political beliefs as "terrorist organizations".

Which can be applied to both groups. So it comes down to the response to that - and we know how ICE is being used and how they are trying to use the NG.

My fear is that this is going to get extremely bloody. Elections won't matter at that point, even if they were held.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io -1 points 1 day ago

You think Trump is immortal?

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s nice to be hopeful. I’m not holding my breath though.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

"now is a time for healing so we are going to hold no one accountable and in a few years when the fascist are back we can do this again"

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

It goes beyond that. Venezuela's oil is heavy crude(if I understood correctly) which is difficult to process and requires specialized refineries in which US oil companies have not invested in.

EDIT: See comments below for corrections and more context.

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A few months ago Trumpist billionaire Paul Singer bought Citgo, the former U.S.-based arm of Venezuela’s state-run oil company. Citgo owns three Gulf Coast refineries custom-built to process Venezuelan crude, refineries that have suffered from the U.S. embargo on imports of that crude. If Trump lifts that embargo, Singer will receive a huge windfall. But this windfall will have nothing to do with reviving Venezuelan production.

https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/the-emperors-new-oil-wealth

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago

Top notch information. Thanks.

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s largely the same as Canadian and Mexican oil, so the infrastructure is very much in place.

It gives Trump an opening to pressure/annex Canada and Mexico, if Venezuela can make up the difference (which they can’t, yet).

[–] cecilkorik@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It's true that the infrastructure is already in place but it is important to understand that it is not simple infrastructure, and with a few exceptions, it is already pretty much fully utilized by Canadian and Mexican heavy crude/bitumen so it's not like they can just double their capacity and start processing Venezuela too. You're right about giving an opening to pressure Canada/Mexico though.

But it's questionable if there's really much upside for the US on the financial side. The opportunity to pressure is definitely there, but more pressure isn't going to get blood out of a stone. Venezuelan oil will still have costs associated with it, and Canadian and Mexican oil is already really cheap.

The oil itself may be essentially free the way they're stealing it with military force, but It's not going to be cheap to build up Venezuela's production infrastructure and it's not going to be cheap to transport the oil stateside, and both Mexico and Canada already have all that infrastructure in place too, and already give a huge discount to the US since they have nowhere else to affordably sell or refine their oil as they have effectively no indigenous refining capacity for heavy crude and few other export options. During a few of the oil price plummets around Covid, Canadian oil (Western Canadian Select) was actually selling for negative prices, Canada was paying the US to take it off their hands and refine it for them. With global oil prices already trending relatively low, it's going to be hard for oil from Venezuela to realistically compete with situations like that.

The most believable explanation that I've heard is that this is not really about directly stealing Venezuela's oil reserves as much as it is about denying it to Russia and China, and maybe securing them in case of some future conflict. And that, I think, makes an awful lot of sense geopolitically as distasteful as I personally find the whole affair.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

So: very specialized, expensive equipment in a small number of locations. What could go wrong?

[–] innermachine@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

While I'm not saying our oil dependency is good, calling it a dying technology is a bit silly. Even electric cars have lots of oil in them, nevermind the phone this is being typed from or my carpets or any other number of daily items. I do wonder if some of the unrest around the world these days is partially out of a fear that theres only so much oil...

[–] GardenGeek@europe.pub 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

While this is true most oil is used as fuel not as material isn't it? Given that the world opts out of oil as fuel there would still be a massive oversupply for the remaining use. Prices would probably come down a lot making exploration of new fields unprofitable in the near future or am I missing something?

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, only 10-15% of oil is used for non-fuel purposes. That is a dramatic reduction in demand.

Also, much of our technology has been built around oil due to byproduct availability. We could, in theory, create all the products we use without oil. It would definitely take time, research, and retooling though.

[–] innermachine@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Yea that's about what I've seen 15 or so % toward plastic, then another 10-20% is used for heating purposes (think home heating oil, kerosene etc) not saying we can't get away from it but for example I'd have to completely redo my home heating system to even think about getting away from using nearly 600 gallons of oil for heat a winter, which for reference I use 40 gallons of gas a month to get to work in my car (significantly less on the bike, but it's a snow globe out there rn) and it takes about a half gal of oil to make a gal of gas. Most of my annual oil consumption comes from heating my home, not fueling my vehicles to transport me 250 miles a week on average

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I am in the same boat, I spent $680 on heating oil last month. I would love to move to split-level heat pump system. Most of the work would be running the electrical as the pumps/vents themselves are pretty easy to install.

[–] innermachine@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

No kidding some days I want to put a sign in my front yard labor free oil changes so I can sift the waste oil and burn it like we do at the shop. I live in the mountains so the heat pump does not work well through most of the winter, but I do have a ac/heat pump mini split and in my small home on the chilly seasons abutting winter it can work well instead of the oil but once were buried in snow im back on the petroleum. This summer I plan on having a good pellet stove installed as I need chimney repair anyhow, my friend had offset almost half his oil usage going that route.

[–] CainTheLongshot@lemmy.world -1 points 18 hours ago

An article i read states that with China and India fully investing into EV technologies, we could see oil demand peak in 2030 and:

“The tragedy is that we’re fighting over barrels that look huge on spreadsheets but shrink rapidly when confronted with physics, economics and time,” said Guy Prince, the head of energy supply research at the thinktank.

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

While the US is a net exporter of oil too.