TABLE 1. Ranking of world provinces that contain oil and gas by known petroleum volumes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent Cum.
of Percent
Rank World of World
excl. Known Petroleum Volumes Volume Volume
of Province Province Assessment Oil Gas NGL Total excl.of excl.of
Rank U.S. Code Name Type (BB) (TCF) (BB) (BBOE) U.S. U.S.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 1174 West Siberian Basin Priority 140.4 1271.8 3.1 355.6 14.3 14.3
2 2 2024 Mesopotamian
Foredeep Basin Priority 292.4 298.3 1.8 344.0 13.8 28.1
3 3 2021 Greater Ghawar Uplift Priority 141.7 248.6 8.6 191.7 7.7 35.8
4 4 2030 Zagros Fold Belt Priority 121.6 399.4 1.4 189.5 7.6 43.4
5 5 2019 Rub Al Khali Basin Priority 89.9 182.3 2.6 122.8 4.9 48.3
6 6 2022 Qatar Arch Priority 1.2 465.6 13.8 92.5 3.7 52
7 7 1015 Volga-Ural Region Priority 64.0 99.2 1.1 81.6 3.3 55.3
8 8 4025 North Sea Graben Priority 44.1 160.6 6.0 76.9 3.1 58.4
9 5047 Western Gulf 26.9 251.6 7.5 76.2
10 5044 Permian Basin 32.7 94.0 6.7 55.0
11 9 6099 Maracaibo Basin Priority 49.1 26.7 <0.1 53.6 2.2 60.6
12 10 7192 Niger Delta Priority 34.8 93.9 2.8 53.3 2.1 62.7
13 11 6098 East Venezuela Basin Priority 30.2 129.7 0.7 52.6 2.1 64.8
14 12 1016 North Caspian Basin Priority 10.8 156.9 8.9 45.8 1.8 66.6
15 13 2043 Sirte Basin Priority 36.7 37.7 0.1 43.1 1.7 68.4
16 14 5305 Villahermosa Uplift Priority 35.0 41.3 0.1 42.0 1.7 70.1
17 15 1154 Amu-Darya Basin Priority 0.8 230.4 1.2 40.3 1.6 71.7
18 5097 Gulf Cenozoic OCS 11.9 140.3 0.0 36.8
19 16 5243 Alberta Basin Priority 15.0 93.7 2.3 32.9 1.3 73
20 17 3127 Bohaiwan Basin Priority 24.6 15.7 0.1 27.3 1.1 74.1
21 18 4035 Northwest German
Basin Priority 2.3 141.7 <0.1 25.9 1.0 75.1
22 19 2058 Grand Erg/Ahnet Basin Priority 0.5 114.2 5.0 24.6 1.0 76.1
23 20 1112 South Caspian Basin Priority 17.4 36.0 0.5 23.9 1.0 77.1
24 5001 Northern Alaska 14.4 33.0 1.1 21.0
25 5058 Anadarko Basin 2.2 93.1 2.8 20.6
26 21 2054 Trias/Ghadames Basin Priority 15.3 25.1 1.0 20.5 0.8 77.9
27 22 1008 Timan-Pechora Basin Priority 13.2 36.6 0.7 20.0 0.8 78.7
28 23 2023 Widyan Basin-Interior
Platform Priority 17.4 7.4 <0.1 18.7 0.8 79.5
29 24 7203 West-Central Coastal Priority 14.5 12.2 0.1 16.6 0.7 80.1
30 5010 San Joaquin Basin 13.8 12.5 0.7 16.6
31 5048 East Texas Basin 9.2 34.8 1.6 16.6
32 25 3144 Songliao Basin Priority 15.5 1.7 0.0 15.8 0.6 80.8
33 5049 Louisiana-Mississippi
Salt Basins 7.1 42.8 1.3 15.6
34 26 3702 Greater Sarawak Basin Priority 0.8 82.3 0.4 14.9 0.6 81.4
35 27 1109 Middle Caspian Basin Priority 9.6 28.7 0.1 14.4 0.6 81.9
36 28 3808 Central Sumatra Basin Priority 13.2 3.9 <0.1 13.9 0.6 82.5
37 29 3701 Baram Delta/Brunei-
Sabah Basin Priority 6.9 36.2 0.2 13.1 0.5 83
38 30 8043 Bombay Priority 8.4 24.2 0.3 12.7 0.5 83.5
39 31 4036 Anglo-Dutch Basin Priority 0.6 71.7 0.1 12.7 0.5 84
40 32 2056 Illizi Basin Priority 3.7 45.1 0.9 12.1 0.5 84.5
41 33 3703 Malay Basin Priority 3.7 48.3 0.3 12.0 0.5 85
42 5043 Palo Duro Basin 1.8 48.4 2.1 11.9
43 34 3817 Kutei Basin Priority 2.9 45.8 1.3 11.8 0.5 85.5
44 35 1050 South Barents Basin Priority 0.0 70.0 0.1 11.8 0.5 86
45 36 1009 Dnieper-Donets Basin Priority 1.6 59.1 0.2 11.7 0.5 86.4
46 37 3948 Northwest Shelf Priority 1.1 56.7 1.0 11.6 0.5 86.9
47 38 6035 Campos Basin Priority 10.1 6.2 <0.1 11.2 0.4 87.3
48 39 2071 Red Sea Basin Priority 9.2 8.5 0.3 10.9 0.4 87.8
49 5014 Los Angeles Basin 8.6 7.0 0.4 10.1
50 5022 San Juan Basin 0.3 38.2 1.4 8.0
http://greenwood.cr.usgs.gov/energy/WorldEnergy/OF97-463/97463tbl1.htmlTo profess such a pedestrian understanding of a country and their people is to overlook the deeper issues at play like the fact that saddom is a defeted agressor under terms to disarm. We are living up to our end of the deal (by stoping the 37 member country coalition in the Iraqi desert, and returning 60,000 surrendered troops), but saddom is not.
Iraq is under an agreement that brought the suspension of hostilities in 1991. How long that suspension lasts is up to saddom.
But here's the zinger that shuts them up:
Q: Name for me the oil field that the USA seized in 1991?
No basis has ever been cited for this accusation — perhaps because the accusation makes no sense, as a matter of basic economics.
Unless the Iraqis drill and sell their oil, it is worthless to them. They must sell it somewhere on the world oil market to get any gain out of it.
But oil is a fungible commodity, so once they sell it — anywhere — it becomes part of the world oil supply. That increased supply in turn reduces the world oil price, until some equilibrium is reached between supply and demand.
From that point on, it doesn't matter to anyone where the Iraqi oil actually goes. If it goes to Japan, the Japanese will buy less oil from Venezuela and Nigeria. More oil from those countries would then go to the U.S. Indeed, as the oil supply sloshes around on world markets, no one really cares — or keeps track of — where it originated, so long as it meets quality standards. For all anybody knows or cares, every drop of Iraqi oil could end up at southern California gas stations.
Moreover, just who do the "war protesters" think Iraq would sell its oil to, in any event? The Western oil companies, primarily American companies, would be the primary purchasers of Iraqi oil, whether they buy it directly or circuitously through various middlemen. Who else is going to refine, distribute, and sell the stuff to the huge Western (and particularly American) consumer market? Have you ever seen or heard of any Iraqi gas stations?
In short, the oil companies already ultimately get the oil now. They don't need Bush to go to war to get it for them.
The proportion of the world oil supply currently consumed by America will continue to get here one way or another through world oil markets. If oil producers tried to cut off the huge American consumer market, there would effectively be a huge drop in the total world demand for their oil — and, consequently, a huge reduction in the world price.
Who else is going to consume world oil output except American consumers (and those gas-guzzling SUVs)? The truth is that Middle Eastern oil producers — including Iraq — need America and its consumers a lot more than we need them. We can always figure out other ways of powering our transportation and warming our homes, technologically. But has the Middle East ever figured out any way of getting dollars other than pumping and selling oil?
That is why an oil boycott is ultimately no real threat either. Again, Iraq and other oil producers must sell the oil somewhere on the world market to get anything out of it. And once they do, they add to the world oil supply and reduce the price to approach a new supply/demand equilibrium. The world oil market then distributes the available oil supply to wherever the demand is — which means America and the rest of the West.
Indeed, it is the West that has been restraining Iraqi oil supply since the Gulf War, with various restrictions on Iraqi oil sales. And it has been the Iraqis who have been pleading to open up their production and sales. An Iraqi oil boycott is not even remotely an issue today.
So the contention that the impending war is really about oil is senseless as well as being baseless. Which leaves us with this question: Why is the American Left joining with its foreign comrades to defame America with this silly and transparently false accusation? Is it really all just about anti-Americanism? Is it really just rooted in a hatred of American power and an attempt to stop its exercise? Isn't it time they came clean and told the truth?
— Peter Ferrara is director of the International Center for Law and Economics in Fairfax, Va.
No you're not.
You're simplisticly naive to translate "it's about oil" to a more restrictive "it's about Iraqi oil."
It is Saddam Hussein's ambitions of territorial expansion that threaten political stability, and petroleum resources, in the entire Persian Gulf region. If this were not true, this regional conflict would be ignored the same as the Hutu and Tutsis in Africa.