Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Which Russian refineries have been damaged or destroyed since 2022?
Executive Summary
Since 2022, multiple Russian refineries have been damaged by drone and missile attacks, with widely reported strikes on facilities including Taneco, Kuibyshev, Ryazan, Syzran, Kirishi, Novoshakhtinsk, NORSI, Slavyansk, Kaluga, and others; damage has ranged from partial outages to repeated hits on major complexes, and some refineries have resumed operations after repairs while others faced sustained disruption [1] [2]. Reporting through September 2025 shows the campaign has continued, with fresh strikes on Gazprom Neftekhim Salavat in Bashkortostan illustrating ongoing vulnerability of Russian refining and petrochemical assets [3].
1. What lists look like when journalists map the damage — a running inventory that matters
Journalists and energy analysts have compiled inventories naming specific refineries hit since 2022; Reuters’ factbox and follow-up reporting enumerate Taneco, Kuibyshev, Ryazan, Novoshakhtinsk, NORSI, Kirishi, Syzran, Slavyansk, and Kaluga as targets, and note instances of both physical damage and temporary shutdowns with some plants returning to service after repairs [1] [4]. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies quantified the aggregate impact as roughly 300 kb/d of crude-processing loss in Q1 2024 attributable to drone strikes, highlighting which refineries produced the most disruption [2]. These lists serve as the primary public record for damage attribution and systemic effects on diesel and middle-distillate markets [2] [5].
2. Who is saying what — reconciling Reuters reporting and academic assessment
Reuters reporting emphasized the operational response, noting Russia’s ability to swiftly repair some sites and reduce idled capacity from nearly 14% to about 10% by mid-April 2024, names several facilities hit, and provides granular factbox detail on individual refineries’ capacity and damage status [1] [4]. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies (OIES) provided a sectoral assessment that corroborates the identity of key targets—Ust Luga, Tuapse, Syzran, Ryazan, and Kuibyshev—while framing the disruption in terms of lost throughput and downstream diesel effects; OIES also suggested possible recovery trajectories for crude runs absent renewed attacks [2] [5]. Together these strands show convergence on which assets were struck while differing on persistence of impact.
3. The scale of impact — numbers, recovery, and market ripple effects
OIES estimated ~300,000 barrels per day of crude-processing loss in Q1 2024 from drone attacks, with middle-distillates (diesel) disproportionately affected and accounting for about 26% of disruptions on average, signaling concentrated effects on specific product markets [2]. Reuters’ reporting indicates that repair activity reduced idled refining capacity by several percentage points by mid-April 2024, implying operational resilience but also persistent vulnerability if attacks resumed [1]. Analysts warned that renewed or expanded strikes could sustain tighter global middle-distillate markets, meaning localized damage transmitted to international fuel availability and prices [5] [2].
4. Continued strikes through 2025 — new targets and escalation risks
Reporting into September 2025 shows the campaign continued beyond 2024: Ukrainian drones struck the Gazprom Neftekhim Salavat complex in Bashkortostan, Russia’s tenth-largest refinery, multiple times within a week, demonstrating ongoing operational exposure of strategic petrochemical sites [3]. Other 2025 sources focus on broader sabotage narratives or Russian strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure, but the Salavat strikes confirm that major Russian refining assets remained targets into late 2025, underscoring a shift from isolated incidents to recurrent pressure on the refining network [6] [7] [3].
5. What’s disputed or uncertain — attribution, damage severity, and recovery timelines
Disagreements among sources center on severity and persistence of outages and how quickly runs can rebound: OIES suggested crude runs could recover to year-ago levels by end of Q2 2024 absent further attacks, while Reuters documented repair efforts that lowered idled capacity but noted that cumulative disruption estimates vary [5] [1]. Public data often combine confirmed strikes with government or company statements that may understate or overstate damage for strategic reasons, so the precise long-term loss and resilience of each named refinery remain subject to revision as repair logs and production data are released [1] [2].
6. Motives and possible agendas behind the reporting — read the bylines
Reporting from Western outlets and independent energy institutes emphasizes the operational and market impact of drone campaigns and tends to document Ukrainian strike claims and repair narratives [1] [2]. Russian sources and state-affiliated statements have incentives to highlight rapid repairs and minimize strategic effect, while Ukrainian and Western analysts may foreground disruptions to underscore tactical success and global market implications; readers should note these agendas when weighing claims about damage extent and recovery speed [1] [3].
7. Bottom line for readers — what is reliably known and what to watch next
It is reliably established that a list of refineries including Taneco, Kuibyshev, Ryazan, Syzran, Kirishi, Novoshakhtinsk, NORSI, Slavyansk, Kaluga, and Gazprom Neftekhim Salavat have been reported hit since 2022, with varying degrees of damage and recurring strikes into 2025; aggregate throughput losses were material in Q1 2024 and market sensitivity, especially for diesel, remains elevated [1] [2] [3]. Watch for updated production and repair data from operators, energy ministry disclosures, and independent market trackers to assess whether strikes translate into sustained capacity loss or remain episodic disruptions [1] [5].