comsc US Politics | AMERICAblog News: Forbes: 'As U.S. Troops Move Out Of Iraq, Oil Companies Move In'
Join Email List | About us | AMERICAblog Gay
Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff

Forbes: 'As U.S. Troops Move Out Of Iraq, Oil Companies Move In'



| Reddit | Tumblr | Digg | FARK

Looks like we may have our Mission Accomplished moment after all. Forbes (h/t KerrynowCampau; my emphasis):

[A]s the troops move out, the oil companies are moving in. According to a July report from the U.S. government’s Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, oil production in Iraq is currently about 2.4 million barrels per day. The goal, by 2017 is to produce 12 million barrels per day. That’s quite a leap, especially since average production levels have held steady for more than two years. It’s going to a take a lot of investment to expand production by 10 million barrels per day.

How much? That’s anybody’s guess. For example, in January, ExxonMobil signed an agreement to redevelop and expand an oil field in southern Iraq. A company spokeswoman says that “total field capital expenditure will depend on full project scope,” which is currently being examined.

There’s a pile of oil money pouring into Iraq right now. Since last year, the Iraqi government has awarded 11 development deals to various consortia. BP and China National Petroleum Corp. are developing the enormous Rumaila field, which has a total proven reserves of about 18 billion barrels. Other companies winning awards include Royal Dutch Shell (working with ExxonMobil on one project and Malaysia’s Petronas on another), France’s Total SpA, Angola’s Sonangol, Italy’s Eni SpA, Russia’s Lukoil and China National Offshore Oil Corp. The signature bonuses to be paid by the consortia are anywhere from $100 million to $500 million.
Looks like the Russians and Chinese get a piece of the action after all. Cheney must be very upset.

There's a lot to notice here, with a large good news–bad news component. Let's go to the tote board:
    It's good for Iraq; they need the income.
    It's bad for Iraq; much of that income will likely be stolen (see: Egypt).

    It's good for oil prices; more supply.
    It's bad for oil prices; customers don't have pricing power anyway.

    It's good for oil companies; mmm, money.
    It's bad for oil companies; mmm, hubris.

    It's good for the world; more oil to play with.
    It's bad for the world; with so much supply, the addict won't switch to a maintenance drug like methadone ethanol.
The next phase of the Iraq war — the battle to build an economy; the battle between corrupt players to control that economy; the role of the 50,000 in tilting that battle for control — has begun.

Forbes has started to tell that story, albeit from a cheerleader perspective. A good read nevertheless. Click and learn.

GP


blog comments powered by Disqus