The U.S. Department of Defense is the largest institutional...

Editor's note: ...consumer of petroleum on Earth, and the numbers back that up in almost any direction you look. Estimates place annual military fuel consumption somewhere between 80 and 100 million barrels a year, translating to roughly 4.6 billion gallons and over $20 billion in annual fuel spending, according to Air and Space Forces Magazine. Since 2021, the Pentagon has burned through about 227 million gallons of diesel and 2.2 billion gallons of jet fuel annually. The Air Force alone accounts for roughly half of that total, largely due to fighter jets, bombers, and transport aircraft. Individual assets illustrate the scale involved: an aircraft carrier can burn about 100,000 gallons of fuel a day at full speed, and an armored division on the move can consume 600,000 gallons in a single day. Beyond fuel, the military's electricity footprint is just as significant. The DoD uses more than 30 terawatt hours of electricity annually to power over 500 installations worldwide, from forward operating bases to domestic facilities. Costs have also been climbing sharply. The average price the Pentagon paid per barrel of fuel rose from about $154 in October to nearly $196 in April, a jump of almost 27 percent in six months, driven largely by fuel market volatility tied to the conflict with Iran. That price surge alone could add more than a billion dollars in unplanned costs this year. Taken together, these figures underscore why the DoD is often described as consuming more energy than most individual countries, even before accounting for the broader logistics network that supports its global operations.
________

America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve – More Fragile Than Headlines Suggest!

By Henry Kamens | July 25, 2026

America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) is more fragile than headlines suggest: aging salt-cavern infrastructure, questionable actual deliverability versus reported inventories, and a growing gap between official figures and physical reality.

America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Let’s cut through the noise and examine the policy decisions across administrations—missed opportunities to replenish during low-price periods and large releases for short-term relief — and parallels to longstanding doubts about physical gold holdings at Fort Knox — and place the U.S. experience within a broader global shift.

More Fragile Than Headlines Suggest

Why the sudden fuss over the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Amid escalating geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, threats to the Strait of Hormuz, and volatile oil markets, the SPR has returned to centre stage. Yet public debate remains fixated on political optics, gasoline prices, and election cycles, while fundamental questions receive scant attention.

Western European nations, already navigating energy transitions and supply diversification challenges following past disruptions, are reassessing their storage capacities.

The renewed political focus on the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve has generated far more noise than clarity. Headlines ask whether the reserve should be tapped again, how much oil actually remains, whether the crude is still of usable quality, and whether the aging underground storage caverns — many carved from former salt formations decades ago — can continue to operate reliably after repeated drawdowns and refills.

Bellwether to BIGGER problems!

Yet the SPR debate is not occurring in isolation. It is inseparable from the geopolitical tensions surrounding Iran and Israel, transit through the Strait of Hormuz, and genocide in Gaza. And the ever-present risk that a regional conflict could disrupt a significant share of the world’s oil supply. Every escalation raises the same question: does the United States still possess a credible strategic buffer against a genuine supply shock?

The immediate political concern is easy to understand: gasoline prices at American pumps, stubborn inflation, and the election day impact of rising energy costs. Those factors inevitably influence decisions made in Washington. But they are not the only issues — and arguably not the most important ones!

Aging infrastructure, energy situation!

How quickly could the SPR actually deliver oil in a major emergency? What investment is required to maintain aging infrastructure? Can repeated cycles of withdrawals and replenishment affect the integrity or operational capacity of the salt caverns?

And, perhaps most importantly, what level of reserve is sufficient in a world where geopolitical risks are increasing rather than declining?

The controversy also reflects competing interpretations of recent policy decisions. During the early months of the gain-of-function COVID-19 pandemic, when oil prices collapsed, the Trump administration proposed purchasing additional crude, to his credit, to replenish and expand the SPR. However, Congress did not fully fund that proposal, mostly due to the opposition of the Democrats, leaving the reserve below its potential capacity.

As one US-based energy policy advisor explained to me, ‘The big mistake the US made was when COVID-19 hit and the price was low, Trump proposed that they buy oil to fill up the strategic reserve. But the Dems blocked it. Later on, Biden released more oil for political reasons. So reserve levels have been lowered both here and in other countries. Some think this will keep the oil price high for a while as countries refill their reserves.’

Double Standards

Later, ironically, the Biden administration authorized historically large releases from the SPR to help offset supply disruptions and moderate fuel prices following Russia’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine. Supporters argued the releases were a legitimate use of the reserve during an extraordinary energy crisis, while critics contended they unnecessarily reduced strategic stockpiles and increased the challenge of replenishing them at higher prices. Whatever one’s political perspective, one consequence is difficult to dispute: reserve inventories declined substantially and must eventually be rebuilt. That replenishment could itself support global oil demand and influence prices over time. But now there is more competition for the same oil to refill reserves.

Perhaps the most significant issue is also the least discussed. Outside a relatively small group of energy specialists, few Americans know the true operational condition of the reserve. Public inventory figures reveal how many barrels remain, but they do not fully answer questions about deliverability, infrastructure resilience, maintenance backlogs, or the speed with which the oil could reach markets during a major international crisis.

Please go to NEO to continue reading.

________

If this assessment is even half correct it is then understandable why the US military is the largest consumer of petroleum on Earth:

Because the US regime is not actually a democracy. It's an authoritarian capitalist oligarchy that maintains a bloody, anti-democratic global empire.

The fact that so many people still believe the US is a democracy is a testament to the success of the extreme brainwashing. https://t.co/ceb73awejI pic.twitter.com/EsOtpyYx2E

— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) July 28, 2026

Whereas in China we are seeing an entirely different picture emerge when it comes to electrical power production and usage:

pic.twitter.com/xe3iy2V1Kf

— Enlightened_Citizen@JohnStuartMill (@JS_Mill_Acolyte) July 28, 2026