Aggregator

The closest the Mets will get to October baseball is scheduled over the next three days in The Bronx.

The ex-Giant will serve the prison sentence, along with three years of supervised release and face a $30,000 fine.

Aaron Rodgers, sports media critic?

The Orange County football mom was living a picture-perfect life of beach escapes, football games, and family fun.

No less than four teams placed a claim on Luis Robert Jr. despite his injury history, including the Padres and Rays. 

Here’s a look at how the teams match up heading into Friday’s series opener in The Bronx. 

Perfectly Timed AI Panic Resurrects 'Bipartisan AI Safety Bill'

A stalled bipartisan artificial intelligence safety bill has suddenly found new life on Capitol Hill - propelled by a combination of dire warnings from inside the industry's leading labs and a brewing grassroots revolt threatening Republicans in key midterm states.

According to a new report from Semafor, momentum is building for a Senate regulatory framework just as a conservative-led "AI Data Center Revolt" bus tour hits the road. Spearheaded by Amy Kremer, a Georgia RNC committeewoman and chair of the AI-risk group Humans First, the tour is set to cross crucial battlegrounds including Texas, Ohio, Iowa, Georgia, and North Carolina. The grassroots push adds a complex layer for Republican candidates - like Texas Senate nominee Ken Paxton and North Carolina's Michael Whatley - who are now caught between Donald Trump's general support for AI infrastructure and growing local opposition to massive data centers.

But in Washington, the sudden legislative urgency looks less like a grassroots miracle and more like a highly coordinated pressure campaign. After weeks of stalled negotiations, the Senate's leading vehicle for AI regulation - negotiated by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) - is suddenly being positioned as the "only viable option" to pass before the end of the year.

What broke the legislative logjam was a perfectly timed, 48-hour media blast from the very labs the bill seeks to regulate.

Panic.exe

Here's how the situation unfolded. 

July 2026: OpenAI discloses that agents escaped a research sandbox, coordinated, and hacked Hugging Face. Within days, Reps. Ted Lieu (D) and Nathaniel Moran (R) drop the AI Kill Switch Act. Reps. Lori Trahan (D) and Jay Obernolte (R) introduce the FRONTIER Act - audits, incident reporting, and Commerce authority to restrict models judged to pose "imminent catastrophic risk."

Late July / August: Senate talks among Amy Klobuchar (D), Ted Cruz (R), and Majority Leader John Thune stall. Punchbowl reported the hang-up: Anthropic and Sen. Maria Cantwell wanted a more disclosure-heavy, stringent version than Republicans would accept. The bill appeared dead.

Then came the September surprise.

The Insider Blast

Sept 8-9, 2026: Jacob Coxon, a 27-year-old pretraining researcher who spent three years at OpenAI then four months at Anthropic, resigns and posts that both labs are "racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives."

"The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade. This is not a marketing stunt."

The thread explodes to 100M+ views. Anthropic's own alignment-science lead, Evan Hubinger, replies on his own account: researchers "earnestly believe AI could kill all humans," and he personally puts the chance above 10% this decade. He adds Anthropic "do[es] not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and [is] not clearly on track to."

Not everyone thinks this is exactly organic: 

Seems like a setup

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 10, 2026

And as Josh Caplan of CAPITAL news points out, he still has equity in OpenAI...

Oh. pic.twitter.com/qU7FXiGljy

— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) September 10, 2026

Sept 9: OpenAI's Chris Lehane publishes "The AI policy window is open. We need to act," calling for mandatory national capability-based safety rules and urging Congress to move before it adjourns. OpenAI says it is now supporting some California bills it previously declined.

Also Sept 9: Anthropic's economics team publishes "Scenarios for our Economic Future" - three paths to 2030. In the extreme one, GDP grows 15% a year, unemployment hits 11.9%, knowledge-worker wages fall more than 10%, and labor's share of GDP drops from about 60% to 45%.

🦔Anthropic published an economic model this week on how AI could affect the US economy by 2030. They ran three scenarios. In the modest one, AI has about the same impact as the internet. In the substantial one, GDP growth doubles but knowledge worker wages go flat. In the…

— Hedgie (@HedgieMarkets) September 9, 2026

The paper lands weeks ahead of an IPO expected at a reported $2 trillion valuation and alongside a $15 billion pre-IPO debt raise.

Regulatory Capture by Panic?

Sept 10, today: Semafor reports the Klobuchar-Cruz-Thune bill is suddenly "the only viable option" before 2027 and "may be introduced as early as next week." Klobuchar: "it's clear we need to act now and not wait." Cruz: working on legislation "to address catastrophic risks involving biological or nuclear threats." Frontier labs and advocacy groups are already feeding Hill staff on unreleased draft text. Bernie Sanders is teeing up a superintelligence ban and a briefing.

AND LOOK... in response to Coxon:

Meanwhile, others are pointing out that the post went extremely viral, extremely fast, for a 'nobody' account:

I don’t think this has ever happened for a post from a new account with almost no prior activity

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 10, 2026

So - years of the same warning, then two months of incidents that may or may not have been blown out of proportion, then a 48-hour media blast from inside the labs, then the stalled bipartisan bill is "the only viable option" and might drop next week.

The 48-hour news cycle created the exact permission structure required to resurrect the Klobuchar-Cruz-Thune bill. Meanwhile, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is threatening a hardline superintelligence ban, which strategically makes the bipartisan compromise appear perfectly moderate.

While the exact text remains unreleased, the live Senate vehicle reportedly focuses on giving the Commerce Department and DHS significant levers over frontier models while preempting the state patchwork.

That preemption is the crucial tell. For a year, Republicans have sought to block states like California and New York from creating their own disjointed audit regimes, while Democrats have demanded affirmative federal safety duties. Frontier incumbents like OpenAI and Anthropic - who are already feeding Hill staff on the draft text - stand to benefit massively from a unified federal floor. Mandatory audits, kill-switch requirements, and incident reporting create a massive compliance moat that smaller startups and open-weight projects cannot afford.

It appears the propaganda is working as the odds an AI Safety Bill being enacted before 2027 have shot up...

As Quoth The Raven opines further:

This (AI regulation) could create an interesting problem for markets (on top of the other catalysts that could cause an AI crash) because Wall Street has spent the last several years making an enormous bet on precisely the opposite outcome. The AI trade isn’t just a handful of technology stocks anymore. It encompasses semis, data centers, cloud infrastructure, networking equipment, electricity generation, utilities, natural gas, nuclear power, cooling equipment, construction and the enormous financing apparatus required to build all of it.

Hundreds of billions of dollars are being committed on the assumption that demand for computing power will continue rising at an extraordinary rate.

Embedded in that assumption is something investors haven’t had much reason to question: that frontier AI development will continue largely uninterrupted.

If Washington changes that assumption, even temporarily, the financial consequences could arrive much faster than the technological ones.

Imagine that increasingly capable models suddenly require federal approval, extensive testing or expensive certification before deployment. Imagine strict liability for certain failures, hard limits on autonomous capabilities or restrictions on training models beyond specified thresholds. An outright moratorium isn’t even necessary. The government would only need to make the timing and economics of future model development less certain.

Markets would then have to reconsider how much computing infrastructure will actually be needed, and how quickly. Data-center projections could come down. Semiconductor forecasts could follow. Electricity-demand estimates could be revised, infrastructure projects could be delayed and lenders could become less enthusiastic about financing projects whose expected returns have suddenly become harder to calculate. The effects would ripple far beyond the companies actually developing the models.

That’s particularly important because markets don’t wait for revenue to disappear before repricing an asset to the downside…just like they don’t wait for profits to price dogshit to the upside. The AI boom has produced enormous valuations because investors expect enormous future demand. Change the expected trajectory of that demand and those valuations can change remarkably quickly.

This doesn’t mean an AI safety bill would necessarily crash the market, nor does it mean regulation would be economically destructive over the long run. Clear rules could ultimately reduce uncertainty and make the industry healthier. A modest bill could also wind up having almost no effect on the pace of development. But a genuinely restrictive regime would introduce a risk that I don’t think the market has spent much time pricing at all.

That’s what makes the timing so interesting. For years, investors have treated faster AI development almost entirely as an economic positive: better models mean more chips, more data centers, more electricity, more software, more productivity and more investment. The safety argument introduces the possibility that faster development eventually becomes politically unacceptable. If lawmakers begin viewing frontier AI as a national-security or catastrophic-risk problem rather than simply another technological industry, the assumptions supporting the AI capital-spending boom could change very quickly.

That leaves us with a remarkable irony. Yesterday I argued that we may have a relatively narrow window in which humans can still meaningfully decide how far and how quickly this technology should advance. A day later, there are signs that Congress is beginning to have exactly that conversation. If the warnings coming from inside the AI industry are remotely accurate, lawmakers arguably have an obligation to take them seriously. But investors should also recognize what serious action could mean…that an AI crash could very well start on, or ahead of schedule.

We have spent years building valuations, infrastructure and investment plans around the assumption that the AI race will keep accelerating. If Washington suddenly decides the race needs a speed limit, AI itself may not be the first thing that breaks…the pure euphoria-fueled market built around its insane financial projections and financing circle jerks could be.

Tyler Durden Thu, 09/10/2026 - 20:15

For 27 minutes on the night of April 23, it seemed possible linebacker Arvell Reese and safety Caleb Downs would be able to share a moving van from Columbus, Ohio, to East Rutherford. 

The Rams’ first game-day roster included several unexpected omissions from their 2026 NFL Draft class. First-round quarterback Ty Simpson, second-round tight end Max Klare and sixth-round receiver C.J. Daniels were inactive for the season opener against the 49ers in Melbourne, Australia, according to ESPN’s Sarah Barshop. Los Angeles Rams quarterback Ty Simpson during practice at...

Here’s our top four most disappointing (or should be it be bottom four?).

Why Family-Run Grocers Are Suing New York Over City-Run Stores

Authored by Russ Jones via The Epoch Times,

Josefina Aguirre grew up among the piñatas hanging from the ceiling of Little Mexico Meat Market, the store her parents opened in New York City's El Barrio in 1997, three years after her father crossed the border from Mexico at 17.

She has a bachelor's degree in business management, a qualification her parents, Oscar and Guadalupe Aguirre, insisted on. But she came back to work at the store anyway - to the same three coolers of fresh cheese and cilantro, the same shelves of jalapeños and tomatillos, and the same customers who still bring in their mail so she can read it to them in English.

The store has survived the opening of a Costco nearby. It survived COVID-19, barely. Her father caught the virus and died before he ever got to enjoy the retirement he had worked 28 years for.

Now, Aguirre and her sisters, who run the shop together, are bracing for what they see as the biggest threat yet: a city-subsidized grocery store that can sell a $10 steak for $7, because, unlike them, it doesn't have to turn a profit.

"We're not scared of competition," Aguirre told The Epoch Times on Aug. 29 from behind the counter in Spanish Harlem. "We just want fair competition."

A dozen blocks south, Yessica Lezama hears the same fear from her parents. Benito and Carmen emigrated from Mexico and became U.S. citizens before opening El Pueblo Mexicano Grocery on Third Avenue 25 years ago. They were drawn to the stretch of neighborhood known for its Mexican community.

Lezama, 38, has worked with her parents for three years, serving the same customers and stocking the same shelves of fruits, vegetables, and Mexican products that have kept the store going for a generation.

"I think it will have a bad impact on sales," Lezama said of the mayor's grocery store plan. "Since we're a Mexican store, the city-run store won't sell the same products, but it will still hurt us."

Lezama said nearby business owners have formed an informal network to share information and support one another as the plan moves forward, meeting regularly to talk through their options.

"We help each other," she said. "It is hard enough already. We don't get a lot of help, and we're worried about going out of business."

Her parents are hoping to do more than just survive, Lezama said. They are working with a small-business association to modernize the store.

"My parents need help to make it more beautiful," she said.

2 Lawsuits, 1 Target

Aguirre is one of hundreds of small-business owners now represented in two lawsuits filed against New York City by the Multicultural Business Coalition, a group representing roughly 1,000 minority-owned bodegas, delis, and supermarkets. The group argues that Mayor Zohran Mamdani's plan to open city-run grocery stores will drive them out of business rather than help their neighborhoods.

The coalition filed a class-action complaint in the New York County Supreme Court on Aug. 24, alleging antitrust violations and predatory pricing, and a second suit the same day alleging that the city retaliated against members after they began organizing against the mayor's plan.

Together, the suits mark one of the most direct legal challenges yet to a marquee policy of Mamdani's first year in office.

The first complaint states, "The Defendants' municipal grocery stores deny the Class Members, hundreds of grocers, many small grocers equal protection, as they are not able to offer discounts that markedly depart from globalized commerce, thereby violating New York's Civil Rights Law."

The second suit states that the "opening of the underlying municipal grocery stores ... is diametrically opposed to the City's longstanding reasons for refusing to allow Walmart to operate grocery stores in the City: that the fallout from allowing Walmart to operate deep discount business, while bringing 'affordability,' further enriching a multibillion-dollar business, would eliminate an untold amount of opportunity for minority businesses, and small business at large."

Mamdani responded to the suits the same day they were filed.

"I'm confident in both the legality of this - that it will stand up in court - and the importance of delivering it," he said at an Aug. 24 news conference.

Frank Garcia, the coalition's chairman and head of the New York State Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, said the mayor's confidence misses what's actually at stake for the coalition's members.

"My grandfather opened up one of the first bodegas in the late 1960s, when East Harlem was burning," he told The Epoch Times.

"I am proud to be following in his tradition, because what Mayor Mamdani is doing is disgracing his memory."

Inside the $70 Million Plan

Under the plan, first unveiled last year, the city will spend $70 million to open five publicly owned grocery stores, one in each borough, offering staples at prices roughly 30 percent below market rate.

The stores won't sell beer, cigarettes, or lottery tickets and will be designed to keep prices low rather than turn a profit. The goal, Mamdani has said, is to make food more affordable in neighborhoods with high poverty rates and limited access to full-service supermarkets.

The Bronx location, in an affordable housing complex in Hunts Point, is expected to open in 2027. The East Harlem store will be located at the 9,000-square-foot marketplace La Marqueta and is projected to open in 2029, according to city officials.

Mamdani has repeatedly defended the initiative.

"I continue to be fully confident in both the legality and the importance of our initiative to deliver five city-run grocery stores, one in each borough, to the people of our city," he said in a statement in July, noting that grocery prices in the city have climbed by roughly 30 percent in recent years and that City Hall could also ease regulations to help existing store owners in the meantime.

Garcia said the coalition tried repeatedly to meet with Mamdani before filing suit, without success, and that the city moved ahead without ever conducting an economic impact study.

"Why are they going against immigrant business owners who can't speak English and defend themselves?" Garcia said. "I don't see that the mayor is being fair."

Mark Jaffe, general counsel for the Multicultural Business Coalition and president of the Greater New York Chamber of Commerce, told The Epoch Times that the city's plan goes further than officials have admitted.

"Their plan is to eventually put every independent store owner out of business," Jaffe said. "And if you're lucky, maybe they'll give you a job."

When he pressed city officials for details on how the stores would actually be run, he said, he got no real answer.

"We asked what the business plan was," Jaffe said. "They told us, 'We don't need a plan, because the people we select will be responsible for coming up with the plan.'"

Jaffe also questioned whether a single store per borough would even reach the people Mamdani says he wants to help.

"Who is this really going to serve?" he said. "By the time you get on the train and spend two hours traveling, you're paying more" than you would have shopping at a neighborhood store.

An Economist's Warning

Economists are divided on what the lawsuits and the underlying policy mean for the city's food supply chain.

Christian Briggs, a political and economic analyst who has advised members of Congress, argued that the plan fits a broader pattern of government expansion into private markets.

"This is a manmade takeover of the food supply system," Briggs told The Epoch Times, comparing the initiative to nationalization efforts he attributed to past presidential administrations.

He noted that grocery stores typically run on net margins of just 4 percent to 5 percent, making a government-subsidized competitor selling goods 30 percent below market what he called "the beginning of the nationalization of our food chain supply system."

Briggs also predicted that despite the coalition's legal argument, consumer behavior would ultimately favor the city-run stores.

"'Free' is the most powerful word in the English language," he said, likening the grocery plan to the long-term trajectory of entitlement programs.

"The lawsuits are valid. They're justified. But in the end, you will not win over the word 'free,' because voters love free."

'Using Taxpayer Money'

Back at Little Mexico Meat Market, Aguirre said the math is simple and unforgiving. Her margin on a $10 steak helps cover her mortgage, her children's tuition, her rent, and utilities.

A city-run competitor selling the same steak for $7, funded by taxpayers rather than sales, doesn't have to make that math work.

"He can afford it because he's using taxpayer money," Aguirre said. "We don't have any help. Loans have been made difficult to get."

She and her sisters have quietly begun discussing plan B, such as teaching or other careers, or anything that doesn't mean losing more of what their father built before he died. That loss follows her behind the register every day - behind the same counter where her father used to stand.

"Is it fair for me to leave and start a new career?" Aguirre asked.

It's not a question she wants to answer. Not yet, anyway.

Tyler Durden Thu, 09/10/2026 - 20:05

Some of the most powerful lessons of 9/11 can be found in the people who endured unimaginable loss — and chose not to answer it with anger or despair.

The stars held court in the Palm Court.  On Thursday, Tommy Hilfiger welcomed more than 50 celebs and much of the cast of his viral ad campaign to his blockbuster spring 2027 show at the Plaza Hotel. Winning serious style points in the front row were Tommy-clad Knicks champs Josh Hart, Miles McBride and Karl-Anthony...

On Sunday, hundreds of Jews in LA will walk to the beach. 

Friday’s U.S. Open semifinal between Ben Shelton and Frances Tiafoe won’t just be a slice of history; it’ll be a peek into the future. 

Citi Says LatAm "Poised For Take-Off" As Powerful Tailwinds Align. Here's Why

Our focus on South America's improving investment outlook, underpinned by a generational shift from left-wing governments to more business-friendly governments, gained support Thursday from Citi's report, "LatAm Poised for Take-Off: The Macro Cycle Turns Latin America's Way."

Citi chief Latin America economist Ernesto Revilla wrote in a note earlier today that a right-wing political shift is serving as a tailwind alongside a weaker dollar, firm commodity prices, and global supply-chain realignment, while stressing that lasting gains depend on reforms and execution. 

Here is Revilla's take on improving LatAM markets: 

Latin America is entering one of its most favorable environments in years, with external and domestic conditions supporting a potential acceleration in growth. The global economy has remained resilient despite recent shocks, while a weaker U.S. dollar and firm commodity prices provide important tailwinds for the region. Latin America is also benefiting from shifting trade patterns, standing out as one of the few regions gaining import market share from both the U.S. and China. At the same time, stronger macroeconomic management, improving policy frameworks, and a more business-friendly political backdrop in several countries are strengthening the investment case. In this report, we examine whether these forces can translate into sustained growth and market outperformance. Our conclusion is clear: the opportunity is significant, but lasting success will depend on reforms, execution, and policy consistency.

Latin America is poised for take-off. Or to be more precise: the conditions for Latin America to achieve a higher rate of growth are the best they have been in decades, and it is time to capitalize on the opportunity.

The last time the region achieved a sustained acceleration in growth was from 2003-2008. Back then, a weak dollar (USD) and strong commodity prices combined to form the backdrop for growth. Those conditions, and more, are present again today.

Still, the development misfortune of Latin America is how little (or no) convergence it has achieved toward higher income levels. Convergence is the expectation that an emerging market will achieve higher growth rates to catch up to developed markets. As a region, Latin America has achieved little sustained convergence over the past 120 years. Consider that in 1990, LatAm's GDP per capita as a share of the U.S. was 28%; in 2024, it was 26.4%. Other regions, particularly Emerging Asia, have achieved significant rates of growth and convergence.

When looking at different eras of growth and development for Latin America, it is not easy to extract common characteristics of high growth episodes. Generally, one would expect that strong commodity prices, domestic political stability or at least policy continuity, and pragmatic governments are minimum conditions. Latin America has those again today. However, history shows that there were periods of strong growth without particularly strong commodity prices (1950 to 1973), or strong investment (the commodities boom of the 2000s).

However, the common denominator across eras when Latin America has achieved high growth and convergence (an increase in its GDP per capita as a share of the U.S. GDP per capita) is when the USD has been weak. This is because a weak USD implies easier financial conditions for emerging markets: Capital flows increase searching for stronger currencies and returns, debt repayment is cheaper, and commodity prices move higher. Right now, the global economy is facing a weak(er) USD regime that has benefited Latin America, and that for various reasons might be expected to continue in the medium term.

The region is enjoying many other tailwinds as well. Commodity prices, and hence terms of trade for the region, are the highest they have been since the supercycle of the 2000s. Latin America has benefited from the global trade reconfiguration as it has been one of the few places in the world that has gained market share both in China and in the U.S. since 2016 when trade tensions started. This is due in part to the extraordinary geographic advantage that Latin America enjoys, being far away from geopolitical conflict, and its possession of large reserves of the minerals and commodities that a world in flux demands. The nearshoring of manufacturing finds the region ideally positioned. Macro management in the region has matured as the successful fight against post-pandemic inflation demonstrates, even ahead of other developed and emerging markets.

The political cycle is a tailwind as well with a turn towards governments that are more explicitly business-friendly and reform-oriented. The right-wing turn, additionally, better aligns the region with a U.S. that is more active in the region at a time when increased foreign investment and attention is being focused on the region.

Despite the many tailwinds that are aligning in favor of the region, growth is not yet accelerating. Growth remains resilient but low, stuck around the 2% trend, below potential and what is needed to escape the non-convergence trap. That is why we see the current period as one of opportunity but not one of a guaranteed era of success. The bull case does not rest on current growth, but on valuation, level of currencies, carry, terms of trade, policy credibility, and the serendipitous combination of favorable factors not seen in more than a decade. Opportunity is there but needs to be captured through action and reforms.

There are challenges of course. We discuss in depth the fiscal one, which in a number of countries requires forceful action amid political constraints and institutional rigidities. We do not discuss others, such as the complex security situation, which has been on top of mind for voters in the region.

Not all favorable circumstances will be in place forever, and some of them are beyond LatAm's control. That is, some of the tailwinds are cyclical, not structural, and some depend on external circumstances, not internal ones. However, across modern Latin American history it is hard to find episodes when a set of positive factors combine serendipitously to set the stage for a higher level of growth and convergence. The stakes for 660 million people living in the region, for investors leveraged to the region's future, and for future generations are high. It also underpins the political stability of the western hemisphere.

This Citi Research report digs deep into the current set of positive factors surrounding Latin America, discusses macro, trade, fiscal and productivity dimensions, and discusses investment implications across asset classes. We are proud to welcome the perspectives of the region's heads of Banking and Wealth as well to add to our view.

Latin America is in the right place, at the right time.

The MSCI Emerging Markets Latin America Index is testing a breakout above a price ceiling that has capped several rallies since roughly 2014. The red dashed line marks resistance near 3,000, where advances stalled around 2017-19. The circled area shows the latest rally pushing back above that level.

The key question is whether 3,000 becomes a new support level, given the political tailwinds from recent elections that have shifted much of the continent to the right after years of failed progressive experiments.

The next big election to watch is Brazil (read the latest report).

Tyler Durden Thu, 09/10/2026 - 19:40

Patrick Mahomes isn’t planning on going into his “Monday Night Football” return to the field with any limitations. 

The true measure of a sailor is how they weather a storm, and swing district Republicans can make out the threatening clouds fast approaching over the horizon.

Sinopec Sees China Oil Demand Falling 8.9% in 2026

By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

China’s Sinopec, the world’s top refiner by capacity, expects Chinese oil demand to drop by 8.9% in 2026 from a year earlier amid demand destruction from higher oil prices and the acceleration of electric vehicle adoption.

Oil demand in the world’s biggest crude oil importer is expected to drop by 600,000 barrels per day (bpd) on average this year compared to last year, according to estimates by Sinopec’s research arm quoted by Reuters.

Gasoline demand is set for an 8.7% decline, while diesel consumption is expected to crash by 11.4%, Sinopec Economics & Development Research Institute says.

The only petroleum product used in transportation that would see an increase is jet fuel, whose demand is expected to increase by 1.3% this year compared to 2025.

The high oil and fuel prices amid the Iran war accelerated the structural shift toward EVs this year, eating into the road transportation fuel demand.

China has managed the Strait of Hormuz crisis better than most expectations as it slashed its imports of crude oil and temporarily banned fuel exports in the spring and early summer.

The high oil prices destroyed some demand and sped up the adoption of EVs, which has been growing anyway in recent years, suppressing total oil demand even without blocked crude supplies in the Middle East.

Amid falling road fuel demand, Sinopec, or China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation as it is officially known, is looking to transform its business.

Sinopec will be allocating more capital to new energy and chemicals by the end of the decade to grow revenues and profits amid the lowest domestic fuel sales in China in nearly a decade.

In its first-half earnings release, Sinopec flagged falling domestic fuel sales, which have been weighing on the company’s earnings for two years now.

“Due to the dampening effect of high oil prices on demand and accelerated substitution by new energy, domestic refined oil products consumption declined by 8.6% year on year, among which gasoline decreased by 7.9%, diesel decreased by 11.5%, while jet fuel (kerosene) rose by 1.3% driven by holiday travel and the recovery of international routes,” Sinopec said in its press release.

Tyler Durden Thu, 09/10/2026 - 19:15

The vote comes with LA set to host the Olympics in 2028, when more than 15,000 athletes expected to descend on the region.