Skip to comments.Iraq oil output to double by 2020: IEA
Posted on 10/09/2012 11:20:42 AM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
LONDON (CNNMoney) -- Iraqi oil production could double by the end of this decade, putting the country on track to become the second-biggest supplier to world markets after Saudi Arabia by the 2030s, the International Energy Agency said Tuesday.
Production could reach 6.1 million barrels per day by 2020, up from the current output of around 3 million barrels a day, and top more than 8 million barrels by 2035, the Paris-based agency said in a special edition of its World Energy Outlook.
Iraq's ability to increase exports will have a major impact on world markets. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
Such rapid growth would generate $200 billion a year of revenue for Iraq and transform the country’s economy, the IEA said.
Should earmark all of it to come to the US.
Now imagine what USA’s domestic production of our own oil sources would do to transform our country’s economy ?
When do they start paying us back?
Is that when we’ll get paid back?
Once the civil war starts between the Shia and Sunni, oil production will be zero.
While the U.S. occupied Iraqi the Iraqi military was mostly refitted with U.S. weapons and equipment. That makes them a U.S. customer for arms, spare parts, technical services, etc. They can get a lot of this stuff from third parties but it cost more. Under Bush the plan was to turn Iraq into a trade partner so they could buy American goods with their oil money. That is happening anyway but by pulling the combat brigades out Obama has invited Al Qaeda back in. Al Qaeda can foment enough tension to get the factions fighting each other and everything goes to hell again.
They have to leave some time. Everyone knew this would happen. I would not want to see our troops over there forever, like Korea or Japan. I think the cost of that would be far greater than any gains made by trading with them.
Wonder if they will ever be able to get that high with Iran stirring the pot?
Iraq, alas, will fall prey to the so-called "oil curse." Revenue will accrue to the government -- not the people -- and, as in Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, etc., will be used to advance the goals of whoever is in power at the moment.
The United States escaped the curse [for the time being] because Americans have the rights to the minerals which lie beneath their property. I'm not sure that there are any other countries in the World with those same rights.
I’m sure many of us have the same question.
Reportedly the Iraqi minister of finance is setting up a system to distribute 25 percent of oil profits directly to the Iraqi people. This has been done in some of the Gulf states for years.
In 1998, the EIA said there'd be a glut of oil worldwide, and the news crashed prices for a year (The only time drilling has stopped completely in this region since oil was discovered in the '50s). Of course, they were wrong, they hadn't taken into account the demand in Asia, but the impact sent a shockwave through the E&P industry that took a year to straighten out.
I suspect that was has happened in Iraq was similar to jumping from 1980 technology to today’s over a few short years.
If they really were operating back in that old of technology and have now brought in outside help, we may really see that kind of jump forward.
It's not altogether different from what Alaska does, either. It strikes me, though, as a sort of welfare check [same as Alaska's.]
I'd have liked to see the Iraqis give ownership of the oil industry to the people. Create a private corporation and issue shares of stock to each citizen. That would have given everyone a stake in its performance and would have curtailed the government's ability to play shenanigans with oil money.
It is only through private ownership that countries can escape the oil "curse."
Good plan. If someone wanted to start a business or go to college they could sell the stock or use it as collateral.
When the new GM issued their IPO it was handled by financial entities close to the White House. The first day or so retail investors could not buy the stock.
What Obama could have done was to offer shares first to individuals and families and hype it like a war bond—”Own a Piece of American Prosperity” or something.
Like you said this would have given citizens a stake in GM’s future. Instead, half the population won't buy GM.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.