EcoModder.com

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)
-   The Lounge (https://ecomodder.com/forum/lounge.html)
-   -   WikiLeaks: Saudis running out of oil (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/wikileaks-saudis-running-out-oil-16060.html)

Frank Lee 02-09-2011 01:25 PM

WikiLeaks: Saudis running out of oil
 
Quote:

By Brett Michael Dykes
The latest startling revelation to come via documents leaked to Julian Assange's muckraking website and published by The Guardian is should give pause to every suburban SUV-driver: U.S. officials think Saudi Arabia is overpromising on its capacity to supply oil to a fuel-thirsty world. That sets up a scenario, the documents show, whereby the Saudis could dramatically underdeliver on output by as soon as next year, sending fuel prices soaring.

The cables detail a meeting between a U.S. diplomat and Sadad al-Husseini, a geologist and former head of exploration for Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, in November 2007. Husseini told the American official that the Saudis are unlikely to keep to their target oil output of 12.5 million barrels per day output in order to keep prices stable. Husseini also indicated that Saudi producers are likely to hit "peak oil"--the point at which global output hit its high mark--as early as 2012. That means, in essence, that it will be all downhill from there for the enormous Saudi oil industry.

"According to al-Husseini, the crux of the issue is twofold. First, it is possible that Saudi reserves are not as bountiful as sometimes described, and the timeline for their production not as unrestrained as Aramco and energy optimists would like to portray," one of the cables reads. "While al-Husseini fundamentally contradicts the Aramco company line, he is no doomsday theorist. His pedigree, experience and outlook demand that his predictions be thoughtfully considered."
WikiLeaks: Saudis running out of oil - Yahoo! News

gone-ot 02-09-2011 01:47 PM

...the SKY may be falling!


...but OIL prices aren't!

NachtRitter 02-09-2011 03:44 PM

Dunno if I'm being weird, but this seems like great news to me...

UFO 02-09-2011 04:09 PM

I understand the Saudis have been overstating their reserves for a while now. Now they won't be able to hide it anymore, if they can't meet production at current prices.

euromodder 02-09-2011 04:11 PM

Availability is also a price issue.
Oilfields that are not economical to explore at the current price levels, will become attractive at higher prices.

If you have something that is in high demand, you'd be foolish to produce more and sell it today at lower prices than what you could make of it next year.
Keeping a steady output while demand rises, will drive up the price by itself.

NeilBlanchard 02-09-2011 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NachtRitter (Post 219525)
Dunno if I'm being weird, but this seems like great news to me...

I agree -- I think we humans will not change (enough) without being forced to. The sooner the price of gasoline goes up in the US, the better?

gone-ot 02-09-2011 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard (Post 219550)
I agree -- I think we humans will not change (enough) without being forced to. The sooner the price of gasoline goes up in the US, the better?

...nothing better than an self-inflicted, impromptu, "amputation" to cure one's hang-nail problem, uh?

jakobnev 02-10-2011 06:19 AM

Wow..

Quote:

wikileaks needs to be hacked, virused and shut down
and..

Quote:

WikiLeaks should be considered illegal and treasonous. No reputable entity should have any association with, or comment or report on, anything WikiLeaks divulges. Releasing classified, confidentail and potentially damaging information (no matter how "entertaining" some my find it) should be dealt with in the harshest manner.
WTH?!?!

Piwoslaw 02-10-2011 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by euromodder (Post 219533)
Availability is also a price issue.
Oilfields that are not economical to explore at the current price levels, will become attractive at higher prices.

If you have something that is in high demand, you'd be foolish to produce more and sell it today at lower prices than what you could make of it next year.
Keeping a steady output while demand rises, will drive up the price by itself.

And how often does production get lowered just to make more money?

gone-ot 02-10-2011 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piwoslaw (Post 219707)
And how often does production get lowered just to make more money?

...as often as you can say "monopoly" and not be referring to the board game :(

wdb 02-10-2011 12:14 PM

Wow - estimates of Saudi oil reserves are all over the place. Hard to know who's zoomin' whom. All things considered, this sounds more like a 'production capacity' issue than a 'proven reserves' issue. For now.

Oil reserves in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Oil Drum | Saudi Oil Production and Reserves - Reasons Behind Wikileaks Concerns
"Nevertheless, Saudi Aramco’s repeated statement about remaining recoverable oil reserves being 260 billion barrels (Gb) is still generally accepted." Interesting chart in there too showing the water content of Saudi oil rising since the 1940's. Makes one wonder how much of the reserves are actually capable of ignition!

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Sau...ackground.html

Frank Lee 02-10-2011 01:15 PM

Quote:

wikileaks needs to be hacked, virused and shut down

WikiLeaks should be considered illegal and treasonous. No reputable entity should have any association with, or comment or report on, anything WikiLeaks divulges. Releasing classified, confidentail and potentially damaging information (no matter how "entertaining" some my find it) should be dealt with in the harshest manner.
Now, now, no neo-con retardism in the thread please. :rolleyes:

UFO 02-10-2011 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakobnev (Post 219701)
Wow..

Quote:
wikileaks needs to be hacked, virused and shut down
and..

Quote:
WikiLeaks should be considered illegal and treasonous. No reputable entity should have any association with, or comment or report on, anything WikiLeaks divulges. Releasing classified, confidentail and potentially damaging information (no matter how "entertaining" some my find it) should be dealt with in the harshest manner.
WTH?!?!

Who are you quoting? Are they not familiar with the FIRST AMENDMENT to the US Constitution????

cfg83 02-10-2011 11:09 PM

UFO -

Quote:

Originally Posted by UFO (Post 219531)
I understand the Saudis have been overstating their reserves for a while now. Now they won't be able to hide it anymore, if they can't meet production at current prices.

Yeah, I read the following back in 2006. I apologize that I can no longer find the link :

Middle East at a crossroads - by Richard Heinberg - August 2006
Quote:

At the fifth annual conference of ASPO (the Association for the Study of Peak Oil), held in July in Pisa, Italy, there were many excellent presentations, one of which I will report on at some length below.
...
Questions about the real size of Kuwait’s oil reserves have emerged in the Kuwaiti National Assembly, leading the opposition party to call for production cuts. Remarkably, Kuwait appears to be groping toward implementation of the Oil Depletion Protocol, without ever having heard of it. However, from the standpoint of nations that want to keep the oil flowing so the global industrial party can continue, this is bad news.

Even worse news, potentially, comes from Saudi Arabia, where oil flows have shrunk by some 400,000 barrels per day over the past few months, despite astronomic prices. No one knows for sure what is going on. The Saudis themselves say the production cuts are due to lack of demand, but this hardly seems plausible, unless the kingdom is only able to deliver unwanted heavy, sour crude to market—but even in that case, one would expect flows to increase, with a price discount factored in for resource quality.

At the same time, the Saudis are hiring just about every spare drilling rig in the world, resulting in a dramatically falling rig count in the Gulf of Mexico—a place that would otherwise be seeing an increasing count, given the fact that Mexico’s giant Cantarell field is in now in steep decline, with dire implications for the nation’s economy.

Matthew Simmons (Twilight in the Desert) has been insisting for the past few years that Saudi production is close to peak and that Ghawar, the world’s biggest field, may be in decline. Now many others are speculating that this is the real reason for the falling production figures.

What happens next? It depends on the real condition of Ghawar. Perhaps a heroic drilling campaign could result in a temporary bloom in production, lasting perhaps three years, followed by a swift, terminal collapse. On the other hand, it is possible that the field has been so thoroughly exploited already that we are seeing the irreversible, rapid decline. At the ASPO conference a well-connected industry insider who wishes not to be directly quoted told me that his own sources inside Saudi Arabia insist that production from Ghawar is now down to less than three million barrels per day, and that the Saudis are maintaining total production at only slowly dwindling levels by producing other fields at maximum rates. This, if true, would be a bombshell: most estimates give production from Ghawar at 5.5 Mb/d.
...

I have also read that the Saudi's damaged there oil fields over the years with bad/cheap pumping practices.

CarloSW2

Odin 02-11-2011 03:45 AM

Seems like peak oil will be hell on the current way of living but will lead us off fossil fuels very quick.

dcb 02-11-2011 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cfg83 (Post 219868)
Yeah, I read the following back in 2006. I apologize that I can no longer find the link :...

I'm not endorsing/refuting the content, but here is the source (it got moved a little bit)
www.energybulletin.net/node/18904


Note to would be researchers, to find it, I googled for (with quotes)
"Perhaps a heroic drilling campaign"

found this link:
peakoil.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=20637&view=next

which had this quote and cited this link:
www.energybulletin.net/18904.html

which was broken, so I put the following verbatim in google to search that site specifically for the phrase which returned a hit:
"Perhaps a heroic drilling campaign" site:www.energybulletin.net

which returned the first link. It is easier done than said :)

MetroMPG 02-11-2011 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Lee (Post 219767)
Now, now, no neo-con retardism in the thread please. :rolleyes:

No political retardism of any stripe, please. Or name-calling.

Nothing wrong with discussing Saudi oil production though.

jakobnev 02-11-2011 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UFO (Post 219770)
Who are you quoting? Are they not familiar with the FIRST AMENDMENT to the US Constitution????

Oh those were just some nuggets i found on Yahoo news.

First? I think these people only know the one about sleeveless t-shirts. (Bare arms or something like that)

jamesqf 02-11-2011 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UFO (Post 219770)
Are they not familiar with the FIRST AMENDMENT to the US Constitution????

Aren't you? It covers statements of opinion, not the theft & publication of private information. Otherwise it'd be perfectly legal for me to hack into your computer, get the passwords for all your bank accounts, and publish them on the web.

Or how about if I put spy cameras in your bedroom, and run a live video stream?

dcb 02-11-2011 01:31 PM

I don't think that is what wikileaks is about, nobody cares (well almost nobody) about UFO's bedroom activities. It is more about holding public/powerful entities accountable.

I'm sure openness of information via tweeting etc is what "helped" cairo get rid of Mubarak

"By disclosing information about corruption, human rights abuses and war crimes, WikiLeaks is a natural contender for the Nobel Peace Prize," Valen said.

UFO 02-11-2011 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesqf (Post 219958)
Aren't you? It covers statements of opinion, not the theft & publication of private information. Otherwise it'd be perfectly legal for me to hack into your computer, get the passwords for all your bank accounts, and publish them on the web.

Or how about if I put spy cameras in your bedroom, and run a live video stream?

Yes, but you seem to lack familiarity with freedom of the press.

Frank Lee 02-11-2011 03:32 PM

AFAIK, Wiki hasn't done any hacking.

Now, about that oil....

duane1 02-11-2011 04:12 PM

Technically they didn't do the hacking.

They merely passed on sensitive information that was stolen, some of which could result in the deaths of people who aided the Americans. A nice thank you to the people who took a chance to help the U.S.

I would just like to state this remind people , its not all innocent whistleblowing here, people could die from this

dcb 02-11-2011 04:14 PM

yah yah, people die from lack of info too, so like frank said, about that oil...

duane1 02-11-2011 08:26 PM

Alberta will be more than happy to supply all the americans need :)

NeilBlanchard 02-11-2011 11:15 PM

The tar sands are the indicator of how oil production is going. We will have to work a lot harder, and pay more for fuel from the tar sands.

Arragonis 02-12-2011 11:33 AM

The same guy in 2004 - this is not new.

Quote:

So what of US government claims that Saudi will pump 22m bpd in 2025? "If, by some miracle, they find some huge fields that have defied discovery for 50 years," Simmons says, "it might happen. Then again, I could be living on the moon in 2025.

"I would say the probability of me living on the moon is higher than Saudi reaching 22m barrels."

Officially, the Saudis dismiss Simmons' analysis. "Matt is talking rubbish," oil minister Ali Al-Naimi has said. So when I went from Simmons' office to meet Sadad Al-Husseini, I expected him to trot out the same line.

After all, until March, Al-Husseini was head of exploration and production at Aramco, the state-owned oil monolith which accounts for 97 per cent of Saudi's crude output. Yet, astonishingly, Al-Husseini lent some credence to Simmons' views.

"The question isn't, can we can pump 15m or 20m barrels daily?" he says. "The question is, how long it can be sustained? We could only manage 22m bpd for a very short time - maybe 10 years. And that would mean an awful lot of depletion, which isn't in the best interests of the global economy."

What does Al-Husseini make of US estimates of future Saudi production? "These are US numbers, not ours," he says. "The American production outlook is much too high."

When I ask Al-Husseini where the EIA is going wrong, he echoes Simmons: "The EIA focuses only on demand. That is why they overestimate not only future Middle East supplies, but non-OPEC and Russian supplies too."
Source 'The West is deluded to rely on Saudi oil'

Oil is not just fuel though, its involved in everything we do in the modern world from the moment we are born to the moment we die - medicines, healthcare, constructions, manufacturing as well as the obvious ones like food, energy and transport.

jamesqf 02-12-2011 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcb (Post 219960)
I don't think that is what wikileaks is about, nobody cares (well almost nobody) about UFO's bedroom activities. It is more about holding public/powerful entities accountable.

Nope, that's not what Wikileaks is about. Remember that after they made the news with their US cables release, their stated next step was to be the release of a lot of private bank account info?

As far as I can see, they have two goals: 1) To make absolutely everything public; and 2) To attack the US.

Frank Lee 02-12-2011 01:32 PM

Instead of attack, I'd say "expose".

euromodder 02-12-2011 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesqf (Post 220099)
As far as I can see, they have two goals: 1) To make absolutely everything public; and 2) To attack the US.

Only those who've tried to cover up their shady politics, their devious plotting and scheming will have anything to fear from WikiLeaks.

Arragonis 02-12-2011 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by euromodder (Post 220116)
Only those who've tried to cover up their shady politics, their devious plotting and scheming will have anything to fear from WikiLeaks.

But that is pretty much the world.

Frank Lee 02-12-2011 05:47 PM

Then Wiki shouldn't necessarily be singling out the U.S......

duane1 02-12-2011 05:55 PM

I'm sure there are a lot of other countires that people would like to know the real story about. (insert your choices here)

However I think wikileaks (assange) knows that if they (he) released docs from those countries, their staff would start having "accidents".

U.S. is an easier target...

Arragonis 02-13-2011 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Lee (Post 220131)
Then Wiki shouldn't necessarily be singling out the U.S......

I don't think they do especially. These cables are from the US so it seems that way, but other stuff they have published has had nothing to do with the US - for example the membership list of the (racist nutters) BNP here in the UK.

*(I'm not a fan of indescriminate leaking either)

Piwoslaw 02-13-2011 01:22 PM

Maybe Wikileaks posts info according to how important it is to the world? What will effect the world more: A leaked cable between Bhutan and Birma, or a leaked cable between Russia and USA? WL posts what it can get its hands on, but it looks for "juicy" gossip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by duane1 (Post 220132)
I'm sure there are a lot of other countires that people would like to know the real story about. (insert your choices here)

However I think wikileaks (assange) knows that if they (he) released docs from those countries, their staff would start having "accidents".

Hard to overlook that...

Arragonis 02-13-2011 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duane1 (Post 220132)
U.S. is an easier target...

Not really, just the biggest.

Boris 03-10-2011 06:03 AM

When all their oil is used up, we might all be riding something with four legs.

Arragonis 03-10-2011 06:12 AM

Saudi proverb

"My grandfather rode a camel, my father drove a car, I fly a jet plane, my son will ride a camel"

texanidiot25 03-10-2011 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Lee (Post 220131)
Then Wiki shouldn't necessarily be singling out the U.S......

They don't, but the media does.

Arragonis 03-10-2011 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by texanidiot25 (Post 224630)
They don't, but the media does.

Or the media focuses of Wikileaks when they feature the US.

Kind of.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com