War for oil promoters read this. Issues Beyond Palo Alto, posted by funny stuff, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Apr 6, 2007 at 2:23 am
In an article written by a left wing media station (CNN) they say America will not get big contracts. This say the oil will go to other nations. I am wonder how you "war for oil" mongers will respong to this.
Posted by Former Oil Worker, a resident of another community, on Apr 6, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Your interpretation of the article isn't correct. These first contracts have some special risk. The Asian Oil companies are willing to assume more risk, have some special expertise, and carry less baggage. But contracts for 60-70,000 barrels from a country capable of producing 3,000,000 barrels per days doesn't mean very much.
The article ends:
"Giving out a few crumbs to the Chinese and Indians is one thing," said Kretzmann, who noted the draft law was seen by both the Bush administration and the International Monetary Fund before it was given to Iraq's parliament. "But the real prize are the contracts that award long-term rights. I think the [Western oil companies] are biding their time."
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Apr 7, 2007 at 6:37 am
I have a hard time understanding the argument against a prefered position for the US in the oil market. Are we required to abstain from buying oil that we have saved for the free world?
Since the direct costs of production of oil is just a small part of the price, and since we are not coercing a decision, the complaints seem to be that the US is acting in the interest of the US. For shame!
Posted by Former Oil Worker, a resident of another community, on Apr 7, 2007 at 8:41 am
I wasn't part of the original discussion so I'm not sure what you are talking about. Oil is fungible. If Iraq ever produces substantial oil, whatever entity is willing to pay the most will buy their oil. Transportation costs are real so Iraqi oil may not end up in the U.S. but some other oil will.
There are only a few multinational oil companies who can successful exploit the reservoirs in Iraq. In the end, those companies will get the contracts (or some subset of those companies). I don't think that's the objection to the law. It is the distribution of profits from the oil which is the perceived problem.
While a company may wish to extract the maximum profit from their investments and this may indeed be possible while our troops are protecting these fields, the trend has been toward nationalization of assets. If the majors are perceived by the Iraqis as unfairly exploiting these oil fields, anti-western sentiment and nationalization will result. It's in the U.S.and the rest of the world to have a stable, long-term supply of oil. For this, the details of this law are important.
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Apr 7, 2007 at 1:12 pm
My holdings have already been discussed.
We have had ample demonstration of the alternative to big business investment, government investment. Guess which one delivers more goodies to the population?
Take? as in take without paying for it?
I do want the United States to get the better of any deal it is involved with because, unlike most of you, I live in this world, not the abstract academic world where all cultures are equally relevant.
Posted by Former Oil Worker, a resident of another community, on Apr 7, 2007 at 1:13 pm
I've worked with major oil companies and they are true multinational companies. They aren't really "American" companies. Oil companies churn their employees at a fast rate, much faster than HP or any local company. It's either "Up or Out" and hire the lowest cost worker. That's one of the problems because the majors lack long-term perspective. They should be looking for the maximum total return rather than the maximum immediate return on their investments. But given the current political environment, it's hard for the majors or anyone else to plan for the long-term.
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Apr 8, 2007 at 6:26 pm
We have empowered OPEC by our absolute refusal to make use of our own petroleum reserves. I would not be surprised to learn that a great deal of the anti-oil hype from greenies is either knowingly or unknowingly helped by OPEC money. You don't think anyone really cares about elk, do you?
Posted by Albert, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Apr 8, 2007 at 6:42 pm
10 more US troops were killed today so we can take 75 percent of the oil that doesn't belong to us. There isn't even one Iraqi who believes that the current Iraqi government is anything but a puppet government that does whatever its American masters tell it to do, and that includes giving away the majority of Iraq's oil. While we have already conceded everything outside of Baghdad, and don't have the troops or money to do anything about it, we are losing Baghdad as well, since outside of one area of the capital, we are getting our behinds kicked. At some point, once the Sh'ite miitias spring back in action, we'lll probably end up getting evicted from the green zone as well, with our dreams of cheap iraqi oil.