So, oil prices are jumping, everyone's worried about the Strait of Hormuz, and the U.S. Energy Secretary is basically telling everyone to chill out. On Sunday, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the worries about a shutdown at that critical shipping lane are overblown. His argument? Shipments are still moving, and the recent jump in prices is being driven more by market anxiety than by any actual missing barrels of oil.

This comes as analysts have been floating $140 oil as a worst-case scenario if Iran were somehow able to choke off the route, which carries roughly 20 million barrels of crude every single day. That's not a small number.

Speaking with Fox News, Wright pointed to a specific example: a large tanker that had already sailed through the strait without any trouble. He argued that U.S. military action is already reducing Iran's ability to attack commercial shipping with drones and missiles. He also said energy "will flow soon," while stressing that the U.S. is acting carefully in the region.

In the same interview with host Shannon Bream, Wright made a key distinction. He said the recent price move wasn't actually tied to a physical lack of oil or gas. Instead, he called it a market reaction to the uncertainty about whether the current conflict becomes a prolonged one. He also argued the U.S. is in a relatively strong position here because it's a major exporter of both crude oil and natural gas and is coordinating closely with allies.

Why the Calm Voice Might Be Surprising

That official reassurance lands against a backdrop of some pretty stark scenario planning from analysts. The team at ING has warned that a forced closure of the Strait of Hormuz could quickly lift the price of ICE Brent crude into the $80 to $90 per barrel range. And that's just for starters. Their analysis shows paths toward $100 oil, and even up to $140, if any supply disruptions were to drag on. In their framework, the real market shock isn't about a single scary headline; it's about the duration and the total scale of any barrels that get taken offline.

ING didn't stop at oil. They also flagged major knock-on risks for natural gas. They argued that European gas and Asian liquefied natural gas (LNG) could see even sharper price moves if cargoes from Qatar—which transit the strait—get interrupted. The firm said the benchmark TTF gas price in Europe could jump to between EUR 80 and EUR 100 per megawatt-hour. For those keeping score at home, that translates to roughly $28 to $35 per MMBtu.

Wright, however, framed the U.S. response as a practical mix of security and logistics. He described a "pragmatic decision" to redirect some Russian crude that was just sitting on tankers offshore in Asia. That oil is being sent into Indian refineries instead, which the administration says will speed up the availability of refined products like gasoline and diesel in the region. Wright was careful to say this move didn't represent a broader policy shift toward Russia, but rather was just an effort to speed up transactions that he suggested were likely to happen anyway.

The Trillion-Dollar Question

This focus on the potential for a long conflict aligns with warnings from other corners of the financial world. Economist Peter Schiff has previously discussed that a prolonged conflict with Iran could end up costing the U.S. over $1 trillion. He's emphasized that the financial burden would come from a double whammy: massive military expenditures and the government borrowing needed to pay for it. The result, he warns, could be inflation that "skyrockets" as economic resources get strained.

Adding to that, economist Mohamed El-Erian has cautioned that the longer any conflict continues, the higher the risk of broader supply chain disruptions. History shows that global supply chains don't tend to fare well under sudden, major shocks, and such disruptions could seriously exacerbate the energy situation far beyond the Middle East.

Chatter in the Market

Beyond the official statements, there's plenty of nervous chatter in the markets. Some of it has focused on infrastructure vulnerabilities, including unconfirmed claims of strikes near Iran's Kharg Island export facilities. That's a key node that could affect about 1.5 million barrels per day of oil, most of which is headed to China. On another front, Israel has shut down its Leviathan and Karish offshore gas fields, a move impacting roughly 17 billion cubic meters of annual natural gas output.

According to reports, Wright has argued the U.S. view is that the world still has ample energy supplies and that the current price premium reflects fear rather than a true physical squeeze. He also said the administration is keeping in close touch with allied countries as the situation develops.

Adding another layer to the deterrence messaging, former President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social, warning Iran not to target the U.S. and writing that "they better not do that," while also threatening retaliation with "a force that has never been seen before." Statements like that are a reminder that the risk of wider military escalation remains central to how traders are trying to price what happens next.

It's Not Just About Oil

Here's the thing often missed in the headlines: the Strait of Hormuz isn't just a superhighway for crude oil. It's also a key artery for LNG. More than 100 billion cubic meters of gas moves through that narrow passage every year. That means any sustained disruption becomes a multi-market event overnight. ING's analysis suggested that natural gas could react even more violently than oil if global buyers start assuming they might lose access to exports from the Gulf for an extended period.

Wright's core argument remains that shipping is still getting through and that U.S. and allied military and diplomatic actions are limiting Iran's capacity to sustain attacks on commercial traffic. In a separate but interesting data point, prediction markets tied to U.S.-Iran diplomacy have shown bettors assigning the highest probability—currently 58%, up 17 percentage points—to a new nuclear deal timeline of "Before 2027." So, while the headlines are about tanks and missiles, some people are still betting on a diplomatic off-ramp, eventually.