Trump tells Saudi to increase oil output by 2mb/d

US President Donald Trump has urged Saudi Arabia to sharply increase its oil production to combat the rising cost of fuel.
Mr Trump tweeted that he had asked Saudi ruler King Salman to raise oil output by up to two million barrels a day.
"Prices to [sic] high! He has agreed!" the president added.
Mr Trump said the move was needed due to "turmoil and dysfunction in Iran and Venezuela".
Oil prices rose last week, partly due to US plans to reimpose sanctions on Iran, a major oil producer.
The Opec oil producers' group agreed to increase output, as did Russia, but this failed to reassure markets.

The Saudi Press Agency confirmed that President Trump and King Salman had spoken by phone, giving few details. It said they had discussed the need to "preserve the stability of the oil market".
The statement did not confirm that Saudi Arabia had agreed to the two million barrels a day figure.


Saudi Arabia is the world's biggest exporter of oil and produced about 10 million barrels a day in May. It is reported to have between 1.5 million and two million barrels a day of spare capacity - but experts told The Wall Street Journal it might not be keen to meet the president's request.
"Saudi Arabia does not really like going beyond 11 million barrels a day and has no intention of expanding its current production capacity. It is expensive," a Saudi official told the paper.
Mr Trump has repeatedly criticised Opec even though US ally Saudi Arabia is a core member.
On 20 April he tweeted that oil prices were "artificially very high", saying this was "no good" and "will not be accepted!"


Iran, another Opec member, has accused Mr Trump of trying to politicise the group and has blamed Riyadh for doing his bidding.
On Saturday, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the US was trying to drive a wedge between Iranians and their government using "economic pressure".
"Six US presidents before him tried this and had to give up," Mr Khamenei cautioned on his website.
The value of Iran's currency, the rial, has tumbled since Washington backed out of the Iran nuclear deal in May.
Earlier this week, thousands of traders at Tehran's Grand Bazaar marched in protest against rising prices and the plummeting value of the rial. It was the biggest protest the city has seen since 2012.

Can we stop calling Saudi Arabia "Saudi", please? It's an adjective. It would be like calling North America "North" or saying "I'm going on vacation to British next week" instead of British Columbia. It doesn't make sense.

Can we stop calling Saudi Arabia "Saudi", please? It's an adjective. It would be like calling North America "North" or saying "I'm going on vacation to British next week" instead of British Columbia. It doesn't make sense.

not really, its more like calling Northern Ireland, the north. or the United States of America, the states or stateside

Everyone knows what you mean

But those are all grammatically correct. "Saudi" is an adjective, however. It's not a place. Again, it's the equivalent of saying "I'm visiting Northern tomorrow..." Northern where? Northern Ireland, French Polynesia, American Samoa, Saudi Arabia.

People might now what you mean, but it's dumb and annoying.

Saying your going north or to the north is perfectly acceptable language. No one would be confused by thinking wonder if you mean samoa or tamoa

Well there is no other place called Saudi, so people will not get confused. In a title including trump, pretty obvious which saudi OP is referring to.

Look, how do you still not get this? The Saudi in Saudi Arabia is an adjective describing part of the Arabian peninsula (which is a place). "Saudi" isn't a place, just like "British" isn't a place.

It's not that people won't know what you mean, it's that it is literally incorrect to say it that way. It makes no sense grammatically.

erm no... 'Saudi' is a place. Grammatically incorrect would be calling it 'arabia' because arabia is the adjective. Noone refers to 'Great Britain' as 'Great'. But it's called 'Britain'.

End of.

I've been reading student room forums for years but never created an account. Of all the things i've seen here, your arguement is the only thing ive felt compelled to create an account for. That alone sums it up i think.

You've got it the wrong way round, buddy. Arabia isn't the adjective, just like Britain isn't the adjective.

Great Britain, Northern Ireland, French Polynesia, Saudi Arabia... Seeing a pattern there?

Nope. No pattern. Regardless of how you put it, 'Saudi' makes literal grammatical sense to everyone.

I can't even begin to imagine why it would annoy you. Like seriously come on.

If only there was a better alternative to oil which wouldn't run out as fast as oil is now. Something renewable that hopefully in the near future wouldn't affect the earth so much. It sounds like a pipe dream I know, but I do hope that I or a different person can do something about it without having the current oil industry crash but rather swap it around with the country's people's consent. I feel that that would be a better move to make. It's a bit ambitious

Look, how do you still not get this? The Saudi in Saudi Arabia is an adjective describing part of the Arabian peninsula (which is a place). "Saudi" isn't a place, just like "British" isn't a place.

It's not that people won't know what you mean, it's that it is literally incorrect to say it that way. It makes no sense grammatically.

You say it's partly down to sanctions on Venezuela, but it's so partly as to be irrelevant, we're talking about half a percent of global output. That's the total output reduction, what we cannot know is what's caused that, sure sanctions will have reduced it but that may only be worth 100,000bpd while the incompetence of the Venezuelan government and their domestic issues might be causing most of the reduction

Alas oil is used for so many things other than simply powering cars, planes and ships the idea that the world could go 'oil free' is simply quite impossible. From medicine to bags etc.