A CATASTROPHE IS UNFOLDING FOR NEW ZEALAND
South Korea which accounts for HALF our refined oil imports is declaring force majeure.
The following follows on from my earlier report and points to a deepening crisis.
There is a catastrophe unfolding for New Zealand. It was announced that South Korea, which, subsequent to the closure of the Marsden Point refinery, accounts for almost half of our refined oil imports is halting exports to New Zealand.
Do I need to remind you that NZ imports 100% of refined fuel since the refinery closure. In addition, New Zealand’s refined fuel imports are heavily concentrated in a few Asian refining hubs
South Korea: ~45–48%
Singapore: ~33–34%
Malaysia / Japan: smaller shares
The problem comes, as I have been pointing out that about 70% of their crude comes from the Middle East and 95% of that normally passes through the Strait of Hormuz
In the last few days we are already seeing:
China halting refined fuel exports
Thailand suspending petroleum exports
India considering withholding product exports
Force majeure declarations are cascading through the supply chain.
Amidst all this Australia is bringing in fuel rationing but our government is rudderless and sitting on its fingers.
Given the treacherous decision to close Marsden Point (filling the pipes with concrete to ensure there is no going back) the logical and only thing for a government to do would be to introduce immediate fuel rationing.
But our government (perhaps alone in the world ourside the United States IS NOT DOING THAT.
In short, it looks OK now but we are headed for disaster.
The main information comes from economist, Bernard Hickey, largely (but not entirely) behind a paywall.
Here is the report (behind a paywall) that alerted me:
The Government is closely monitoring reports that South Korea could end fuel exports, but there has been no official suggestion that they would, Finance Minister Nicola Willis says.
I then discovered Bernard Hickey’s report:
Dawn Chorus: NZ’s fuel fate in South Korea’s hands
South Korea, which provides 48% of NZ’s fuel imports, may ban all refined fuel exports; Castalia report sees 1% GDP hit from 50% cut in fuel imports; Auckland intensification fight intensifies
Mar 10, 2026
Briefly in the news in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Wednesday, March 11:
The immediate fate of New Zealand’s economy is in the hands of South Korean fuel refinery owners and the South Korean Government this morning.
South Korea is considering banning all exports of refined fuel to protect its own economy in the event of an extended closure of the Strait of Hormuz.1
South Korea now provides 48% of New Zealand’s fuel imports, which are now all imported directly since the closure of the Marsden Point refinery four years ago.2
A report3 for the Government last year on fuel security found a 50% reduction in fuel imports for an extended period was likely to cut GDP by as much as 1%.
A ministerial group is due to meet today to discuss the fuel situation, with no talk yet of rationing, although Associate Energy Minister Shane Jones says things will get serious by May if there is no opening of the Strait of Hormuz. He has not mentioned the South Korean situation4.
Auckland Council will debate housing intensification today, including how to cut housing capacity from 2 million to 1.6 million, and where that will happen.5
Wellington’s real estate market is in turmoil because of long delays getting LIMS for first home buyers, The Post-$6 reports this morning. Paying subscribers can see more below the paywall fold & hear more in the podcast above.
South Korea may ban fuel exports to New Zealand
Argus Media, an oil industry publication, reports from sources in South Korea’s Government and refining industry that South Korea is considering joining China in banning exports of refined fuels to protect its own economy
There are a couple of reports from individuals and organisations that have a clue.
Hormuz crisis critical to New Zealand
Tue 10 Mar 2026
Image: Nathan Surendran / Facebook
By Nathan Surendran
COMMENT: Why the Hormuz crisis is a symptom, not the disease – and what it means for New Zealand.
One week after US-Israeli strikes on Iran triggered the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the crisis has moved well beyond a shipping disruption.
This matters to New Zealand more than almost any other developed nation, because since the closure of the Marsden Point refinery in 2022, we import 100% of our refined fuel.
Approximately 81% of it comes from South Korean and Singaporean refineries that process Middle Eastern crude – crude that reaches them through the Strait of Hormuz.
Force Majeure declarations are now cascading through the entire supply chain that New Zealand depends on for 100% of its refined fuel, from Gulf producers through to the South Korean and Singaporean refineries that supply our petrol, diesel, and jet fuel. When a supplier declares Force Majeure, it is legally stating that it cannot fulfil its contracts.
Our minimum diesel stockholding provides roughly 21 days of cover. The increase to 28 days isn’t scheduled until July 2028.
New Zealand may have only two to three weeks of physical fuel in the country, the pipeline of future deliveries is being disrupted by Force Majeure, and the bulk of our stated 90-day reserves consist of untested paper agreements with overseas governments.
Image: Wise Response
Last week, the Wise Response Society – which I chair – issued a press release calling on the government to be transparent about the severity of our exposure, to activate the National Fuel Plan, and to investigate equitable rationing frameworks before shortages arrive rather than after.
If the New Zealand government has a plan for rationing fuel, it has not discussed it with the public. It is the position of the Wise Response Society that it must do so immediately.
But this article isn’t about the crisis of the week. It’s about the crisis underneath it.
The whitepaper
I have released a whitepaper: The Limits to the Energy Transition: What Physics Means for New Zealand’s Economy. It represents a summary of my current understanding synthesising the biophysical economics literature – Hall, Keen, Murphy, Garrett, Hagens, Smil, Delannoy and others – and applying it specifically to New Zealand’s situation.
The central argument is straightforward, even if the implications are not.
The global economy is not a financial system that happens to use energy. It is an energy system that happens to use money. When the net energy available to society contracts – as it is now doing, due to the rising energy cost of extracting what remains – the real economy must also contract. No monetary policy, no financial engineering, no amount of optimism can override this. The constraint is physical.
What the paper covers
The paper works through several connected arguments.
First, that the Energy Cost of Energy is rising. We harvested the best, most accessible fossil fuel reserves first. What remains is deeper, more dispersed, and more energy-intensive to extract. The net energy peak for oil – the energy actually available to society after extraction costs – likely occurred around 2025, even though gross production continues.
Second, that the proposed renewable replacement is constrained by mineral availability and energy density limits. Solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries are better described as “rebuildables” – they harvest renewable energy flows, but the stock of materials and fossil fuel energy required to build, install, maintain, and replace them is finite and substantial. The transition is being built by the very energy source it proposes to replace.
Third, that New Zealand sits in a uniquely exposed position: no domestic refining, 21 days of diesel reserves, complete dependence on maritime supply chains through contested chokepoints, and an agricultural export economy that runs on diesel from paddock to port.
The paper also steel-mans the rapid transition case – the solar cost revolution, emerging battery chemistries like sodium-ion, electrification efficiency gains. These are real, welcome developments. Solar should be deployed aggressively. Electrification of light transport and heating should be accelerated. But the claim that these developments can sustain current levels of economic complexity, let alone continued growth, is not supported by the physical evidence.
Why this matters now
The Hormuz crisis is not an anomaly. It is a preview. The conflicts over remaining fossil fuel resources – in the Middle East, Ukraine, the South China Sea – follow a well-documented pattern of major powers competing for control of the energy that underpins their economies. As the highest-quality reserves deplete, these contests intensify. New Zealand cannot control this. What it can control is its level of preparation.
The whitepaper concludes that the appropriate response is not to abandon the renewable transition – it is essential – but to plan honestly for a smaller, less energy-intensive economy alongside it. That means prioritising food security, water, and essential services. It means building resilience rather than optimising for efficiency. It means preparing equitable distribution mechanisms – like Tradable Energy Quotas – for deployment when supply disruptions materialise.
And it means honest communication. The most dangerous aspect of our current situation is not the physical constraints themselves.
Managed early, they are navigable. The danger is the refusal to acknowledge them – every year of continued investment in a growth-dependent model that cannot be sustained is a year of misallocated capital, deferred adaptation, and increased fragility.
The physics is not negotiable. Our response to the physics is.
I’ve tried to write the whitepaper so that the arguments can be engaged with on their merits, with full references. Some of the conclusions are unwelcome. I ask only that you engage with the physics before reaching for the reassurance of conventional economic assumptions. Strategic descision making from this point forwards must take into account the world as it is, not as we’d like it to be.
If you’re a business owner, board member, or policymaker in New Zealand, the question is no longer whether these constraints will affect you. It’s whether you’ll have prepared, mentally, personally, and corporately for them when they do.
Nathan Surendran is the principal consultant at Schema Consulting Ltd and chairperson of the Wise Response Society. He specialises in biophysical economics, energy systems engineering, and long-term resilience planning for New Zealand businesses and communities. He is based in Southland.
And this -
Hormuz Crisis Deepens: One Week In, The Strait Remains Closed And New Zealand Has No Plan
March 9, 2026
Press Release – The Wise Response Society
Wise Response Society calls for immediate rationing preparation as conflict duration projections lengthen and Australia begins fuel rationing.
9 March 2026 – One week after US-Israeli strikes on Iran triggered the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the Wise Response Society warns that the situation has deteriorated significantly since its initial alert on 3rd March – and that the New Zealand government’s silence on contingency planning is becoming increasingly dangerous.
If the New Zealand government has a plan for rationing fuel, it has not discussed it with the public. It is the position of the Wise Response Society that it must do so immediately.
In the nine days since US-Israeli strikes on Iran triggered the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the crisis has moved well beyond a shipping disruption. Force Majeure declarations are now cascading through the entire supply chain that New Zealand depends on for 100% of its refined fuel, from Gulf producers through to the South Korean and Singaporean refineries that supply our petrol, diesel, and jet fuel. When a supplier declares Force Majeure, it is legally stating that it cannot fulfil its contracts. New Zealand may have only two to three weeks of physical fuel in the country, the pipeline of future deliveries is being disrupted by Force Majeure, and the bulk of our stated 90-day reserves consist of untested paper agreements with overseas governments.
Yet the New Zealand government has offered no public assessment of fuel supply risk, no activation of the National Fuel Security Plan, and no indication that contingency planning is underway. Countries across the region, from Thailand to Myanmar to India, have already taken concrete action. New Zealand has said nothing.
Wise Response Chair Nathan Surendran says it is clear the conflict is not going to be the “four-week process” projected by President Trump.
“This puts New Zealand in a critical situation that needs planning, public awareness, and action readiness. New Zealand is at the end of a very long supply chain and is more vulnerable than most to supply shocks of this kind. All of our exporting and importing relies on timely supply of fuel, and this is about to be seriously disrupted. All of our productive sector also relies on timely fuel supply, so this too will be heavily disrupted. The government needs to be getting its rationing priorities in place now so that people and businesses can plan for themselves.”
The conflict is not ending in four weeks
When Wise Response issued its first press release on this subject last week, President Trump was projecting a “four-week process.” One week later, that timeline is looking increasingly unrealistic.
Analysts at Verisk Maplecroft warn that the US should “brace for potentially an extended conflict,” noting that Iran is “a huge country with a huge population” and a very extensive security apparatus. The Brookings Institution’s Suzanne Maloney has said the situation is “going to be more complicated than the White House may have hoped.” Oxford Economics initially projected one to three weeks, with a maximum of two months. US war aims have shifted repeatedly – from destroying Iran’s nuclear programme, to eliminating its ballistic missile capability, to unspecified “protection of the American public.”
Iran’s retaliatory missile rate has declined, likely reflecting elimination of targets and reduced missile defence systems interdictions leading to higher success rates per launch, but the IRGC continues to attack vessels and maintain its hold on the strait. There is no ceasefire, no negotiation, and no clear off-ramp. Iran’s security chief Ali Larijani has explicitly rejected talks with the US.
Most critically for energy markets, the damage is becoming structural. On 6 March, Qatar’s Energy Minister Saad Sherida al-Kaabi warned that if the war continues, other Gulf energy producers may be forced to halt exports and declare Force Majeure. Qatar had already stopped gas production on 2 March and declared Force Majeure on gas contracts on 4 March. Oil fields across the Gulf have shut down as a precaution. Oil facilities in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia have been struck by Iranian missiles. This is no longer a shipping logistics problem that resolves when the strait reopens – production infrastructure is being damaged and taken offline.
Iranian strikes have hit refineries in at least six countries: Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Oman. Saudi Aramco’s Ras Tanura refinery – the kingdom’s largest – has been shut down. Qatar’s Ras Laffan LNG facility, the biggest in the world, has been struck. Fuel storage at Oman’s port of Duqm has been hit by drones. Oil fields in Iraq and Kuwait have been forced to cut production because Gulf storage is filling up with nowhere to ship crude. As Rystad Energy’s Amir Zaman warned this weekend, restarting oilfields that have been shut in “could take days or weeks or months, depending on the types of fields, age of the field, the type of shut-in.” The idea that this crisis ends when the shooting stops is a dangerous illusion. The physical damage has already been done, and the supply disruption will outlast the conflict itself.
This point cannot be overstated: even if traffic through the Strait of Hormuz were restored tomorrow – and it will not be – the damage already inflicted on energy infrastructure across the region would take months to repair. Additionally, a significant proportion of New Zealand’s strategic reserve is ‘preferential buy options on the oil market, and declarations of Force Majeure mean those options / obligations cannot be met as we describe below.
New Zealand’s fuel supply chain is under direct and mounting pressure
The headline oil price – Brent crude at approximately US$93 per barrel as of Friday’s close, up over 20% in a single week – understates the severity of the situation for New Zealand. Goldman Sachs has warned that prices could exceed US$100 per barrel this week if no resolution emerges.
But the real story is in refined products and physical crude markets, which is where New Zealand’s actual exposure lies. Kpler, a leading commodity intelligence firm, reports that physical crude delivered into China is now approaching US$100 per barrel – well above the paper futures price. Singapore jet fuel prices have surged approximately 140%. If crude had moved in proportion to jet fuel, Brent would already be trading around US$175. The gap between paper and physical markets reflects a dangerous complacency: financial markets are still treating this as a temporary disruption, while the physical supply chain is already in crisis.
The Asian refineries that supply virtually all of New Zealand’s fuel are under direct pressure:
South Korea, which provides 48% of NZ’s refined fuel imports, sources approximately 70% of its crude from the Middle East, with over 95% of that volume transiting the Strait of Hormuz. South Korea’s four major refiners have formed a joint task force. Kpler has recommended that South Korean refineries make proactive run-cut decisions – that is, reduce output – due to reduced crude supply and feedstock scheduling challenges.
Singapore, which provides 33% of NZ’s refined fuel imports, has no domestic oil or gas production whatsoever. It is one of Asia’s three principal refining centres and is reporting reduced output due to disrupted Middle Eastern crude supply.
China, which holds roughly 18% of global refining capacity, ordered its largest oil refineries to halt diesel and petrol exports on 5 March. India has instructed state-owned enterprises to consider withholding clean product exports. Thailand suspended crude and petroleum exports on 1 March. Indonesia is calling force majeure on some contracts.
As the New Zealand Energy Substack reported this week: diesel is likely to tighten before petrol, because Asian refineries are optimised for the medium sour crudes from the Middle East that are no longer arriving. They cannot simply substitute other crude grades and produce the same product mix. Diesel powers New Zealand’s freight, agriculture, construction, and fishing fleets. It is the most economically critical fuel we import.
New Zealand’s fuel reserves – 28 days of petrol, 24 days of jet fuel, and just 21 days of diesel – were not designed for this scenario. The diesel reserve is not scheduled to increase to 28 days until July 2028. Industry estimates suggest the country typically holds only two to three weeks of commercial fuel stocks in storage. Contracted March cargoes are reportedly still in transit, but unless the situation resolves quickly, April supply is in serious question.
Force Majeure is cascading through NZ’s supply chain
The legal term Force Majeure, meaning an unforeseeable event that prevents a party from fulfilling a contract, has become the defining feature of this crisis. In the past week, declarations have cascaded from Gulf producers through to the Asian refiners and petrochemical manufacturers that sit directly upstream of New Zealand.
Gulf producers:
QatarEnergy (Qatar) declared Force Majeure on LNG deliveries around 3-4 March, after halting production at Ras Laffan, the world’s largest LNG export facility. Qatar’s Energy Minister Saad Sherida al-Kaabi has warned that all remaining Gulf exporters are expected to declare Force Majeure within days if the situation continues, and has predicted oil could hit US$150 per barrel if the war continues for weeks.
Kuwait Petroleum Corporation formally declared Force Majeure on oil and refinery products around 7 March, citing Iranian threats, attacks on Kuwaiti territory, and the absence of available vessels.
New Zealand’s direct supply chain:
Yeochun NCC (South Korea) declared Force Majeure on 4 March on petrochemical supply, because naphtha feedstock is no longer available. 54% of South Korea’s naphtha supply normally transits the Strait of Hormuz.
PCS (Singapore) declared Force Majeure on 5 March on all customer shipments.
Aster Chemicals and Energy (Singapore) declared Force Majeure around 7 March on ethylene and propylene supplies.
Chandra Asri (Indonesia) declared Force Majeure on 3 March on all contracts, citing raw material disruption.
Petronet LNG (India) issued a Force Majeure notice on 3 March on its Gas Sale and Purchase Agreement.
Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals (MRPL) (India) declared Force Majeure around 5 March on all future gasoline export cargoes. MRPL has also shut its crude unit and secondary units at its 300,000 barrel-per-day refinery.
Beyond formal Force Majeure declarations, production shutdowns are spreading. Iraq is holding back production as storage fills. The UAE’s ADNOC is cutting offshore production. Saudi Arabia has shut its biggest refinery. In China, Zhejiang Petrochemical (backed by Saudi Aramco) has shut a 200,000 barrel-per-day crude distillation unit, and Fujian Refining has shut an 80,000 barrel-per-day crude unit. China ordered a halt to new refined gasoline export contracts on 5 March. Thailand has halted all fuel exports. Vietnam’s Binh Son Refining has asked the government to prioritise domestic crude supply and limit exports through Q3.
The Force Majeure declarations cascading through our supply chain threaten the pipeline of future deliveries. When suppliers like those in South Korea and Singapore declare Force Majeure, it means the contracted fuel cargoes that New Zealand is relying on to replenish Tier 1 and Tier 2 stocks may simply not arrive. Meanwhile, the oil tickets that make up the bulk of the 90-day headline figure have never been tested in a crisis of this magnitude, and there is no public information on whether New Zealand could actually draw on them while the US, UK, and Japan are themselves scrambling for supply. In a global crisis where those same countries are simultaneously under fuel supply stress, the practical value of these tickets is questionable at best.
Australia is already rationing fuel. New Zealand is pretending nothing is happening.
Across the Tasman, the situation has moved beyond warnings. Australian fuel wholesalers have begun rationing petrol and diesel supplies to retailers, driven by a combination of panic buying and tightening wholesale supply. Queues have formed at service stations in Perth and Sydney. Petrol prices have jumped from A$1.71 to over A$2.13 per litre.
Professor Allan Fels, former chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, has warned publicly that if the conflict continues beyond six weeks, Australia will need to implement formal fuel rationing – comparing the potential measures to the rationing seen during the 1973 Arab oil embargo. Australia holds 36 days of petrol reserves – more than New Zealand – and its strategic reserves are still non-compliant with International Energy Agency requirements despite years of efforts to close the gap.
The Australian Maritime Union has declared that Australia’s fuel security crisis “has been laid bare” and called for urgent rebuilding of sovereign fuel storage and domestic refining capacity. The Australian Climate Council has warned that the crisis demonstrates the fundamental vulnerability of economies still dependent on imported fossil fuels.
New Zealand has less fuel in reserve than Australia, less domestic refining capacity (none), and sits further from alternative supply sources. Yet the New Zealand government has offered no public assessment of fuel supply risk, no activation of the Fuel Sector Coordinating Entity, and no indication that contingency planning is underway.
What Wise Response is calling for
1. Immediate government transparency on fuel supply status. The government must tell New Zealanders exactly how much physical fuel is currently in tanks onshore, how much is aboard tankers in transit, and how much of our 90-day IEA obligation consists of untested oil tickets held by governments that are themselves under fuel supply stress. It must disclose what the contracted supply pipeline looks like for April and whether any of NZ’s fuel purchase contracts have been affected by the Force Majeure declarations cascading through our supply chain. The public deserves honest information, not silence.
2. Activate the National Fuel Security Plan. The government’s own Fuel Security Plan (November 2025) outlines contingency steps for exactly this scenario, including activation of the Fuel Sector Coordinating Entity to lead disruption response. These mechanisms should be activated now, publicly and transparently, not held in reserve until shortages are already upon us.
3. Prepare an equitable rationing framework using Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs). If rationing becomes necessary, and with each day this crisis continues it becomes more likely, the only question is whether it will be fair or chaotic.
Without a rationing framework, the default outcome is price rationing: pump prices spike, panic buying accelerates shortages, and those least able to afford fuel, including rural communities, farmers, freight operators, and lower-income households, are left most exposed. This is already happening in Australia.
Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) provide a proven, equitable alternative. Every citizen receives an equal basic energy entitlement. Those who use less can sell their surplus. Those who need more, such as farmers and freight operators, can purchase additional units on an open market. The system guarantees a floor for vulnerable households while accommodating the varying energy needs of different sectors.
TEQs are explicitly designed for precisely this situation: a nation confronting immediate fuel scarcity while needing to manage a longer-term structural transition away from imported fossil fuels. The system was subject to extensive UK Government scrutiny and was endorsed by the UK All Party Parliamentary Group on Peak Oil. I first called for investigation of TEQs in my August 2025 submission to the DPMC Long-term Resilience Briefing on behalf of the Wise Response Society. The current crisis makes that call not merely urgent but overdue.
4. Acknowledge the structural reality. This crisis is not an aberration. It is the predictable consequence of a nation with no domestic refining, no meaningful strategic reserve, and near-total dependence on imported hydrocarbons sitting at the end of the world’s longest and most fragile supply chain. The long-term response must include rapid electrification of transport and industry, investment in decentralised domestic renewable energy, and planned reduction in aggregate energy demand. But those measures take years. The rationing framework is needed now.
The window is closing
One week ago, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz was an emerging crisis. Today, it is an established fact with Force Majeure declarations cascading through every link in New Zealand’s fuel supply chain. The strait is not reopening. The conflict is not ending quickly. The Asian refineries that supply New Zealand are cutting output and restricting exports. Australia is already rationing.
New Zealand has perhaps two to three weeks of physical fuel in the country. The tankers and purchase contracts that are supposed to replenish those stocks are being disrupted by Force Majeure declarations across the supply chain. The oil tickets that make up the bulk of the 90-day headline figure have never been tested. The time for contingency planning was before this crisis began. The time for transparency is now. The time for rationing preparation is before the queues form, not after.
I haven’t even mentioned the problems relating to imports of fertiliser.
Without oil, and without fertiliser we are stymied (in the vernacular f**ked).
You may see an end to this.
I don’t.
Here is a more general report relating to the US
Jet Fuel Shock Looms on U.S. West Coast as Asian Exports Dry Up
March 10, 2026
By Lori-Ann LaRocco – Energy export data shows South Korean jet fuel exports to the United States West Coast is dropping as countries around the world are holding onto the energy for its own self-preservation.
“South Korean jet fuel exports have slowed, currently averaging about half the pace so far in March that they were last year, and that pace should only slow further,” said Matt Smith lead oil analyst at Kpler. “This is problematic for the US West Coast, which is the leading destination. The US West Coast relies on South Korea for 85 percent of its jet fuel imports.”
The decrease in South Korea jet fuel exports to the U.S. follows China and Thailand restricting refined product exports.
“It’s particularly concerning is if other countries, such as Japan and Korea follow those countries lead in restricting refined product exports and a hoarding mentality sets in as politicians order builds in gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel inventory to ensure their own domestic supply,” said Andy Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates.
The origin of jet fuel imports for the West Coast come from Asia due to its proximity. The reason- refinery capacity on the West Coast.
Phillips66 Rodeo refinery in Los Angeles and Valero Benicia refineries have closed because of California energy regulations, high gas prices and reduced gasoline demand due to state banning the sale of new cars with gasoline engines beginning 2035.
“These refinery closures are going to result in an increase of imports,” said Andy Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates. “Estimates based on refinery configuration and publicly available information that the Phillips66 refinery in Los Angeles which was shut by October 2025 produced about 13,000-15,000 barrels per day of jet fuel and Valero Benicia which just shut down produced 10,000 – 15,000 barrels per day.
Lipow stressed the loss of west coast domestic jet fuel supply would have to come from imports.
Shipbrokers and oil experts tell gCaptain the closure is beginning to ripple through Jet fuel markets.
“Key refineries and export routes are disrupted,” said Jelle Vreeman, an independent shipbroker. “Jet supply chains are tightening, and the usual flow of product toward North West Europe is at risk of significant disruption, potentially pushing prices higher and squeezing supply even more creating an even more bullish market.”
U.S. Jet fuel inventories will be key in withstanding the duration of the strike.
For the week ending February 26, 2026, inventories for PADD 5 jet fuel were 11.1 million barrels.
“Which is at the higher end of the range over the last 35 years,” said Lipow. “In 2025, PADD 5 imported 93,000 barrels per day of jet fuel. Korea supplied 80,000, China 4,000, Japan 3,000 and small amounts from others.”
Lipow added, “In 2024 PADD5 jet fuel imports go to Alaska about 31,000 Hawaii 28,000 and California 22,000. In 2025, imports increased to another 12,000 barrels per day probably to California from the refinery closures. Note how much goes to Alaska, it is refueling of cargo planes coming from Asia. Hawaii only has one refinery, hence a lot of imports.”
“The price of jet fuel will increase, along with all other petroleum derivatives,” said Lynn Hughes, investigative analyst at ImportGenius. “This has significant implications for air freight and passenger travel and will drive certain routes and firms into unprofitability.”
If the West Coast needed jet fuel due to limited South Korean imports, only Jones Act vessels would be able to move additional domestic crude or refined jet fuel.The United States has approximately 49 active Jones Act tankers according to Marad which move energy cargoes between U.S. ports. The Jones Act energy trade moves refined products from refining centers in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi to states like Florida. The vessels also move crude from Alaska to refineries in Washington State and California
What NZ First is saying
Peters has repeatedly argued that allowing the refinery to close was “politically and economically suicidal” and that losing refining capacity “imperils the whole economy.”
The argument is that without the refinery New Zealand now depends entirely on imported refined fuel.
That means supply decisions made overseas can directly affect NZ.
The refinery shut in 2022, ending the country’s only domestic refining capability and converting the site into an import terminal instead.
Government studies also acknowledge the structural change:
The refinery closure “changed the nature of risks” to NZ’s fuel supply security
The truth is:
Even if Marsden Point were still operating, it wouldn’t fully solve the current crisis scenario
If you're not in a position to leave NZ, at least move to a neighbourhood that's within easy walking distance to work, grocery stores, a hardware store, a clinic (or hospital), etc. Sell your car and grow a garden. The way things are going, this crisis could last years.
More damnable damage done by Trump's America and Netanyahu's Israel by their war of choosing and Losing!