> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
You could have said:
"Punishing supply would not do much without decreasing demand, it will just redistribute the profits. Moreover, the profits might go to less morally sound places."
1) Supply tends to meet demand at the cost of the marginal supplier. 2) If the West is not willing to, the rest of the folks will be happy to do so.
Btw more than 50% of the global liquids demand is for diesel, jet fuel and bunker fuel for ships. At the time of writing we do not have any viable alternatives for these, and we do not expect to have them ready and scaled up in the next 8 years.
We can replace all jet fuel with biofuel, all diesel with electric or hydrogen.
This extreme scenario of fossil demand destruction is the only scenario where Aramco does not become an effective monopoly for decades.
That is if we don’t start a World War to solve the upcoming energy crisis.