• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Deborah Gordon"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SCP",
  "programs": [
    "Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics"
  ],
  "projects": [
    "Carnegie Oil Initiative"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Climate Change"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Drama at the Gas Pump: The Curse of High and Low Energy Prices

American consumers, industries, and policymakers cannot allow themselves to be seduced by short-term, reactive thinking when it comes to oil.

Link Copied
By Deborah Gordon
Published on Jan 2, 2015
Project hero Image

Project

Carnegie Oil Initiative

The Carnegie Oil Initiative analyzed global oils, assessing their differences from climate, environmental, economic, and geopolitical perspectives. This knowledge provides strategic guidance and policy frameworks for decision making.

Learn More

Source: National Interest

We have no clue where the price of oil will settle, when it will settle or if it will settle at all. After swinging wildly from $115 per barrel this summer to under $60 in December, experts’ predictions of future oil prices lie in a vast range between $50 and $200.

It is anticipated that small changes in oil supply and demand could lead to big price swings, disrupting the relative stability in the oil market witnessed over the last several years and introducing a new era of volatility.

There’s a global buzz about who will win and who will lose amid changing oil-market conditions. High oil prices benefit suppliers, mainly oil-rich nations such as the OPEC nations, Russia and Venezuela. Low prices can send these countries into an economic tailspin, depriving them of a major source of revenue and causing political unrest at home. In contrast, low oil prices benefit consumers, especially in wealthy and heavily motorized nations, including Japan, the EU and China. Here, high prices can constrain consumption and stunt economic growth.

Most nations fall into one of these two categories: either they produce oil and win when the price is high, or they consume it and win when it is low. America, however, is shaping up to be a major outlier.

Unlike the other leading actors in the oil market, America has recently achieved a relative parity between total petroleum production and consumption. In 2014, America’s crude oil and petroleum liquids supply averaged nearly 14 million barrels a day (mbd) while demand hovered around 19 mbd. (Other nations that figure prominently in global oil markets are saddled with net petroleum supply or demand imbalances of a factor of two or more).

America’s recent resource rebalancing might seem to be the best of all worlds. We enjoy greater economic stability than many other countries.

But there’s a catch. Our ability to make long-term energy plans and policy commitments is hampered by myopic decision making. Energy consumers and producers often act irrationally in the face of market uncertainty, basing decisions on short-term factors, rather than on enduring realities and opportunities.

Consumers tend to spend impulsively when oil prices fall and are ill prepared for uncertain oil markets. Take, for example, the recent uptick in U.S. passenger truck sales. When gas was $3.50 a gallon, the annual fuel bill for a Toyota Corolla was $1,320. Today, with gas perched around $2 (different parts of the country vary), it costs $40 less to fill a GMC Sierra (though it guzzles 70-percent more gas). Consumers buy this new math: Sierra sales were up 57 percent in November compared to last year. Purchasing an inefficient vehicle that will be on the road for a decade or longer will saddle motorists with highly variable fuel bills. When pump prices inevitably rise again, pickup trucks and SUVs become an economic burden, imposing difficult consumer trade-offs.

Producers tend to act boldly when oil prices are high and find themselves unprepared for market uncertainty. Oil infrastructure—pipelines, refineries, drilling rigs, shipping terminals, petrochemical plants and more—is expensive and built to last generations. High oil prices spur corporate spending sprees to increase marginal productivity and bolster industry returns. When prices are volatile, major oil investments and sound operating decisions are difficult to reconcile, risking market mayhem. Price volatility makes it as likely that some will rush into hasty investment decisions in order to reach for the next market peak, while others will pressure the government for subsidies, regulatory relaxation or other market assurances.

As consumers wish for oil prices to remain low, producers hope for high prices to support the next stage of resource development. Policy makers are pulled in both directions, hampering their ability to craft coherent long-term plans in the nation’s interest.

While the United States can more easily withstand low and high oil prices than Russia, China and others, increasing market volatility will nonetheless be costly and disruptive. American consumers, industries and policy makers cannot allow themselves to be seduced by short-term, reactive thinking when it comes to oil. Just because there’s no impending energy-supply crisis, does not mean that America can lose sight of the need to correct oil market failures and adopt durable energy and environmental policies, including more-robust oil reporting requirements, tighter heavy-duty truck fuel economy standards, more stringent marine vessel emission standards, vehicle electrification incentives and carbon taxes. It’s time to renew our oil vows—for richer and for poorer.

This article was originally published in the National Interest.

About the Author

Deborah Gordon

Former Director and Senior Fellow, Energy and Climate Program

Gordon was director of Carnegie’s Energy and Climate Program, where her research focuses on oil and climate change issues in North America and globally.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Petroleum Companies Need a Credible Climate Plan

      Deborah Gordon, Stephen D. Ziman

  • Article
    Advancing Public Climate Engineering Disclosure

      Deborah Gordon, Smriti Kumble, David Livingston

Deborah Gordon
Former Director and Senior Fellow, Energy and Climate Program
Deborah Gordon
Climate ChangeNorth AmericaUnited States

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Commentary
    AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance Gap

    How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?

      Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega

  • Commentary
    The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor Cooperation

    The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.

      Shruti Mittal

  • Article
    What Could a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement Do for U.S.-India Ties?

    India and the United States are close to concluding a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement (RDPA) that will allow firms from the two countries to sell to each other’s defense establishments more easily. While this may not remedy the specific grievances both sides may have regarding larger bilateral issues, an RDPA could restore some momentum, following the trade deal announcement.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?

    On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil Imports

    This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.

      Vrinda Sahai

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.