Can someone explain this to me?

[Jeemie]

Can someone explain why Congress thinks it's a good idea to threaten Saudi Arabia with a cutoff of weapons deliveries if they don't boost their oil output, while at the same time rebuffing our own efforts to develop ANWR and the coastal shelf?

Now, don't get me wrong- I'm well aware that oil supplies are becoming more and more constrained, and we simply must undergo a concerted effort to wean ourselves off of it, but these moves by Congress make absolutely ZERO sense to me.

And the threat to Saudi Arabia is not only puzzling, it's dangerous. What? You don't think China would not be eager to step into the gap left behind by our cutoff of arms to Saudi Arabia?

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

No

[Bob Juch]

Who's "Congress"? The only thing I can find mentions Sen. Chuck Schumer, period.

Bush sure didn't do much to get them to supply more oil.

[Jeemie]

Who's "Congress"? The only thing I can find mentions Sen. Chuck Schumer, period.

Bush sure didn't do much to get them to supply more oil.

Why are you turning this into a partisan thread?

I was asking for someone to explain the logic of Congress' move. Yes- Schumer is sponsoring it, but from what I have hear, this has some support.

Posturing, no doubt, but still...

[Bob Juch]

Who's "Congress"? The only thing I can find mentions Sen. Chuck Schumer, period.

Bush sure didn't do much to get them to supply more oil.

Why are you turning this into a partisan thread?

I was asking for someone to explain the logic of Congress' move. Yes- Schumer is sponsoring it, but from what I have hear, this has some support.

Posturing, no doubt, but still...

I mentioned Schumer, I didn't say I agreed with him. I mentioned Bush, I didn't really criticize him. How is that partisan?

"Congress" hasn't done anything - yet. A bill was introduced in the Senate, nothing more.

[wbtravis007]

Can someone explain why Congress thinks it's a good idea to threaten Saudi Arabia with a cutoff of weapons deliveries if they don't boost their oil output, while at the same time rebuffing our own efforts to develop ANWR and the coastal shelf?

Now, don't get me wrong- I'm well aware that oil supplies are becoming more and more constrained, and we simply must undergo a concerted effort to wean ourselves off of it, but these moves by Congress make absolutely ZERO sense to me.

And the threat to Saudi Arabia is not only puzzling, it's dangerous. What? You don't think China would not be eager to step into the gap left behind by our cutoff of arms to Saudi Arabia?

I don't think that it's logically inconsistent. If we were to agree that the exploration of ANWR and the coastal shelf would result in environmental or other consequences that would outweigh the benefit of additional production -- (and I'm not taking a position on that here) -- and would also argue to the Saudi's that they should seek production anywhere possible, regardless of the consequences, even if it involved drillig on, say, the site of a Mosque, well ... that would be kind of inconsistent. (Assuming that we wouldn't also argue that their opinions on non-monetary consequences should be given lees weight than our opinions, that is.)

[etaoin22]

Perhaps because the current price rise has been engineered by the Saudis?

At any rate, if sending over $100 a barrel is what it takes to bring oil out of the ground in Arabia and Mesopotamia, it is worthless to the West in the long run.

Might as well hand over the keys to Western Civilization to Abdullan, Osama and Ahmadinejad.

[Jeemie]

Can someone explain why Congress thinks it's a good idea to threaten Saudi Arabia with a cutoff of weapons deliveries if they don't boost their oil output, while at the same time rebuffing our own efforts to develop ANWR and the coastal shelf?

Now, don't get me wrong- I'm well aware that oil supplies are becoming more and more constrained, and we simply must undergo a concerted effort to wean ourselves off of it, but these moves by Congress make absolutely ZERO sense to me.

And the threat to Saudi Arabia is not only puzzling, it's dangerous. What? You don't think China would not be eager to step into the gap left behind by our cutoff of arms to Saudi Arabia?

I don't think that it's logically inconsistent. If we were to agree that the exploration of ANWR and the coastal shelf would result in environmental or other consequences that would outweigh the benefit of additional production -- (and I'm not taking a position on that here) -- and would also argue to the Saudi's that they should seek production anywhere possible, regardless of the consequences, even if it involved drillig on, say, the site of a Mosque, well ... that would be kind of inconsistent. (Assuming that we wouldn't also argue that their opinions on non-monetary consequences should be given lees weight than our opinions, that is.)

Still makes zero sense, as we aren't the only country that can offer the "weapons carrot".

In this day and age of $128 dollar oil, we cannot afford to take such a stupid course of action.

[Jeemie]

Perhaps because the current price rise has been engineered by the Saudis?

At any rate, if sending over $100 a barrel is what it takes to bring oil out of the ground in Arabia and Mesopotamia, it is worthless to the West in the long run.

Might as well hand over the keys to Western Civilization to Abdullan, Osama and Ahmadinejad.

Engineer, schmengineer.

The Saudis have done everything but smack us over the head with the fact that they have no spare capacity available.

They can't say it outright, of course, but if you follow their production behavior over the past couple of years, and it's obvious they're going full-out and just barely staying in place production-wise.

Peak Oil is at hand, folks- prepare for a bumpy ride!

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Saudi Aramco Says New Oil Field, Khursaniyah, Starts Production

By Maher Chmaytelli

April 20 (Bloomberg) -- Saudi Arabia has started production at the Khursaniyah field that will eventually pump 500,000 barrels a day, the head of state-run oil company Saudi Aramco said.

The new field on the east coast ``has already started,'' Saudi Aramco Chief Executive Officer Abdallah Jum'ah said in Rome today, where he is attending the International Energy Forum.

Saudi Arabia is funneling about $90 billion of its oil wealth back into oil production and refining activities in the next five years in an effort to retain its status as the world's largest oil exporter.

Abdulaziz al-Judaimi, Saudi Aramco's vice president of new business development, said in London on April 9 that Khursaniyah would start this month and would be producing 300,000 barrels a day within a month.

Saudi Arabia pumped about 9.2 million barrels of crude a day last month, and has a production capacity of about 10.8 million barrels a day, according to Bloomberg estimates.

Aramco is also working to add production capacity at its Shaybah, Manifa and Khurais oil fields, and by 2009 aims to have boosted its production capacity to 12.5 million


and

World Oil production figures from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) International Petroleum monthly for February 2008 reached a new high of 85.921 million barrels of oil per day. 36.881 million barrels of oil per day from OPEC in February. 74.657 million barrels of oil per day world oil production including lease condensate which is up from 74.431 millions barrels of oil per day in January, 2008.

This was an increase from the January, 2008 figure of 85.628 million barrels of oil per day.

[BigDrawMan]

natl geographic had a story about a massive find adjacent to ANWR.It is potentially larger than ANWR, but oil types are cool to it as it will be tougher to extract than anwr.

The Ruskies have passed the saudis as the #1 producer.

peak oil is not at hand.

[Jeemie]

natl geographic had a story about a massive find adjacent to ANWR.It is potentially larger than ANWR, but oil types are cool to it as it will be tougher to extract than anwr.

The Ruskies have passed the saudis as the #1 producer.

peak oil is not at hand.

Correction- Russians HAD passed Saudi Arabia as the #1 producer...but they are now suffering production declines and Saudi Arabia is king again.

Oil production has been on a bumpy plateau since 2005 despite massive increases in oil prices. This despite oil-producing countries drilling all-out (well- except for the US) during that time.

New consumption growth has exceeded new discovery growth for 20 years. The gap between the two is growing.

New discoveries peaked 40 years ago.

38 of 47 oil-producing countries are at or have passed peak oil production.

Net exports from the major oil producers are declining at a rate that would have them at ZERO by 2020.

Peak Oil IS at hand- the oil-producing countries are doing everything but screaming this at us.

Actions speak louder than words, anyway.