Jump to content


Photo

Storm In A Teacup, Or Rn Vs. Iran


  • Please log in to reply
280 replies to this topic

#241 JWB

JWB

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,769 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 1108 AM

 

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?


The US has about 50 billion barrels of oil reserves. In the current state, the US is producing 15 million barrels a day. That makes about 5 billion in 1 year. It'll be gone in 10 years at the current rate. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but if not, no one is talking about. America seems to have no idea that they will be in an oil crunch situation not long from now.

 

You are off by a factor of 6.

"The U.S. added nearly 50 billion barrels in 2017 and now has an estimated 310 billion barrels of recoverable oil, which are equal to 79 years of U.S. production at the current pace of output, Rystad said."

https://oilprice.com...-Reserves.html#


  • 0

#242 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,507 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 1130 AM

Qatar appears to be keeping a careful profile regarding the strike. Perhaps it should, as if the Saudis decide to settle all family business in response, they may not be discriminating in who is targeted in retaliation.


  • 0

#243 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,586 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 2041 PM

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?


The US has about 50 billion barrels of oil reserves. In the current state, the US is producing 15 million barrels a day. That makes about 5 billion in 1 year. It'll be gone in 10 years at the current rate. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but if not, no one is talking about. America seems to have no idea that they will be in an oil crunch situation not long from now.
You are off by a factor of 6.
"The U.S. added nearly 50 billion barrels in 2017 and now has an estimated 310 billion barrels of recoverable oil, which are equal to 79 years of U.S. production at the current pace of output, Rystad said."[/size]
https://oilprice.com...-Reserves.html#[/size]

Ok, my google-fu failed me.

It brings it back to Chris's question then.
  • 0

#244 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,507 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 2246 PM

What the Pentagon may be asking itself after receiving the strike package from Saudi intelligence:

These coordinates are located in Doha...
  • 0

#245 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,479 posts

Posted 19 September 2019 - 0003 AM

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?


The US has about 50 billion barrels of oil reserves. In the current state, the US is producing 15 million barrels a day. That makes about 5 billion in 1 year. It'll be gone in 10 years at the current rate. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but if not, no one is talking about. America seems to have no idea that they will be in an oil crunch situation not long from now.



I have a set of books from the 60s that predicted an oil crunch 20 years from the publishing.

As oil technology expands, new reserves are found and previously inaccessible reserves are made accessible.
  • 0

#246 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,479 posts

Posted 19 September 2019 - 0010 AM

I wish that were the case, but...oil is a Fungible Commodity.


Also, AFAIK the US currently exports most of its shale oil because its domestic refineries are still largely set up for the imported crude types. Until those capabilities get reconfigured to process its own supply, "net exporter" merely means they're selling more of their oil abroad than the slightly smaller volume they are importing from the same sources as everybody else.


Hmm.

Looks like there is capacity for it but it's at it's limit.

https://www.cnbc.com...pportunity.html
  • 0

#247 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,694 posts

Posted 19 September 2019 - 0313 AM

Qatar appears to be keeping a careful profile regarding the strike. Perhaps it should, as if the Saudis decide to settle all family business in response, they may not be discriminating in who is targeted in retaliation.

 

Qatar shares its massive gas field with the Iranians. It never wants to completely upset the applecart with that country, and obviously KSA's recent behavior has made the country rather unsympathetic to the Saudi cause. They aren't in any danger of being overrun with CENTCOM sitting on what is probably the largest US base/logistical node in the region smack dab in the middle of the country.


  • 0

#248 Mikel2

Mikel2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,612 posts

Posted 21 September 2019 - 0710 AM

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?

The US has about 50 billion barrels of oil reserves. In the current state, the US is producing 15 million barrels a day. That makes about 5 billion in 1 year. It'll be gone in 10 years at the current rate. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but if not, no one is talking about. America seems to have no idea that they will be in an oil crunch situation not long from now.

I have a set of books from the 60s that predicted an oil crunch 20 years from the publishing.

As oil technology expands, new reserves are found and previously inaccessible reserves are made accessible.

And as prices rise, oil previously out of econocal reach becomes viable, increasing inventories.
  • 0

#249 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 515 posts

Posted 21 September 2019 - 0928 AM


 

The current president just fired the guy who wanted a military strike on Iran.
 
Israel and Israelis should now prepare themselves for exclusion from talks between Washington and Tehran in a manner similar to the way Japan and Japanese have been excluded from talks between Washington and Pyongyang.

Israel always was excluded; that was part of Bibis gripe. Whether its in US interests to include them or not is a matter open to opinion, but definitely the US doesnt need permission to make its own deals.
 
AIPAC would probably beg to differ, at least wishfully.
 
To be excluded once can be blamed on Obama. To be excluded twice may entail a reconsideration of Trump's status there in various ways.

Israel was neither included nor entirely excluded. Its interests were taken into account by Obama, as well as gulf states' interests, just insufficiently.

To Israel and the gulf states, the deal meant a LOT of money and resources would suddenly be funneled to Iran's proxies, which would either force Israel and the gulf states into spending far more resources of their own to counter that massive buildup, or face incessant attacks on their infrastructure.
  • 0

#250 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,479 posts

Posted 21 September 2019 - 1110 AM

 

 

 

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?

The US has about 50 billion barrels of oil reserves. In the current state, the US is producing 15 million barrels a day. That makes about 5 billion in 1 year. It'll be gone in 10 years at the current rate. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but if not, no one is talking about. America seems to have no idea that they will be in an oil crunch situation not long from now.

I have a set of books from the 60s that predicted an oil crunch 20 years from the publishing.

As oil technology expands, new reserves are found and previously inaccessible reserves are made accessible.

And as prices rise, oil previously out of econocal reach becomes viable, increasing inventories.

 

Yep. Wells previously capped in the US as uneconomic to extract from are now profitable based on tech costs, value of the commodity, etc. I strangely remember reports from I think the 80s (70s?) when we were going through this before, I seem to remember it being 60 minutes or something with Walter Cronkite...Anyhow, I distinctly remember the reports indicating that we had reserves but that they were too expensive to tap and were thus capped being saved for a future date. This was probably one of the first "aha!" moments I had about cost vs value when it came to a commodity. 


Edited by rmgill, 21 September 2019 - 1110 AM.

  • 0

#251 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Staff
  • PipPip
  • 11,093 posts

Posted 22 September 2019 - 0601 AM

I think we can all agree the US is no longer dependent on ME oil and won't be for a very long time, if ever. The major country with the most to worry about, energy security wise IMHO is China. Is it not time they took over the US lead in responsibility for security of hydrocarbon transportation from the area?
  • 0

#252 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,586 posts

Posted 22 September 2019 - 0928 AM

I think we can all agree the US is no longer dependent on ME oil and won't be for a very long time, if ever. The major country with the most to worry about, energy security wise IMHO is China. Is it not time they took over the US lead in responsibility for security of hydrocarbon transportation from the area?

 

When they drop the 9 dash line claim, their claim on Taiwan, and their claim on the Senkaku islands, then they earn possible trust for that role.


  • 0

#253 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Staff
  • PipPip
  • 11,093 posts

Posted 22 September 2019 - 0942 AM

 

I think we can all agree the US is no longer dependent on ME oil and won't be for a very long time, if ever. The major country with the most to worry about, energy security wise IMHO is China. Is it not time they took over the US lead in responsibility for security of hydrocarbon transportation from the area?

 

When they drop the 9 dash line claim, their claim on Taiwan, and their claim on the Senkaku islands, then they earn possible trust for that role.

 

 

I was being a little bit ironic :)  I'd add, pull out of Tibet to that list.


  • 0

#254 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,586 posts

Posted 22 September 2019 - 0944 AM

 

 

I think we can all agree the US is no longer dependent on ME oil and won't be for a very long time, if ever. The major country with the most to worry about, energy security wise IMHO is China. Is it not time they took over the US lead in responsibility for security of hydrocarbon transportation from the area?

 

When they drop the 9 dash line claim, their claim on Taiwan, and their claim on the Senkaku islands, then they earn possible trust for that role.

 

 

I was being a little bit ironic :)  I'd add, pull out of Tibet to that list.

 

 

Ok, sorry, lost in plain text.


  • 0

#255 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,507 posts

Posted 24 September 2019 - 2323 PM

I think we can all agree the US is no longer dependent on ME oil and won't be for a very long time, if ever. The major country with the most to worry about, energy security wise IMHO is China. Is it not time they took over the US lead in responsibility for security of hydrocarbon transportation from the area?


Japan would not be far behind in that regard, and neither would a powerful Japanese Squadron should the USN ever decide to renege on the naval responsibilities it uses to justify its naval expenditures.
  • 0

#256 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,359 posts

Posted 27 September 2019 - 0238 AM

USN Seal Trained Seal destroys peaceful Russian Naval Vessel.

https://www.military...-in-the-arctic/

yes, this is mentioned elsewhere so It doesnt appear to be a fake.


  • 0

#257 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,580 posts

Posted 27 September 2019 - 0831 AM

Sealed its fate, so to speak?


  • 0

#258 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Staff
  • PipPip
  • 11,093 posts

Posted 29 September 2019 - 1035 AM

Sealed its fate, so to speak?

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=f0Rm0x73oD4  :)


  • 0

#259 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,580 posts

Posted 30 September 2019 - 1058 AM

Reports that Russia is offering Iran the S-400 system after the expiration of the UN restrictions in 2020.  No word yet that Iran will request it, but the fact the offer is public means that the limitations will not be renewed.


  • 0

#260 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,027 posts

Posted 30 September 2019 - 1116 AM

Iran would still have to pay for it though, I don't think the Russians are offering it for free.


  • 0