Iran facing Collapse of Oil Output

#2
jonwilly said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml;jsessionid=C3LULOZ5ZDE0HQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/money/2006/12/28/cnoil28.xml

Intresting artical
john
Russia is interesting in high oil prices so rezidenturas around the World routinely paid for articles of this sort.

Mr. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard received ... errr... top secret :D :D :D
 
#3
:idea: Maybe the civil nuclear programme is not such a daft and pointless idea as some would have us believe then... :idea:

:?
 
#4
Everyone will need something else other than oil for power reasonably soon and I understand Iran's drive to supply itself with the most proven technology alternative. It is simple necessity.

It is just a shame that the leader of the country is a lunatic in his own right and a mouth piece for the religous hardliners who choose him. Face it, unless there is a modicum of trust between Iran and certain Western powers in the very near future, all the Iranian hard work is going to go up in a ball of smoke, be it via a present from Israel or US of A.
 
#5
Maybe the civil nuclear programme is not such a daft and pointless idea as some would have us believe then..
Actually it's brilliant that they have combined it with a Korean rocket program so they can deliver electricity to remote areas.

I wonder if our friends to the North of Iran will enjoy their expanding influence in Central Asia as the Chinese occupy Siberia.................with Russian males having the lifespan of fireflies it looks like the place will be re-populated by Muslims and Chinese
 
#6
Iran needs oil to fund its support of terrorist groups. A collapse of its industry would put a crimp in their ambitions. But have no fear I am sure the Russians and Chinese are more than happy to step in to assist.
 
#7
Gen. tomahawk6 US Army retd. said:
Iran needs oil to fund its support of terrorist groups. A collapse of its industry would put a crimp in their ambitions. But have no fear I am sure the Russians and Chinese are more than happy to step in to assist.
Sometimes it really is difficult to understand what you're trying to say. From these three sentences, I draw the following conclusions:

1. You like the idea of the Iranian oil industry collapsing because the won't have the funds to support terrorism. Which suggests helping them gain a civilian nuclear power programme might be a good idea.

2. If the Iranians do not fund terror groups, you assume Russia and China will fund them instead.

Are you sure about all this???
 
#8
I am saying that it has been US policy to hamstring Iran's ability to fund terror. With the oil industry in a poor state of repair I suspect the Russians and Chinese would step in to help modernize the Iranian oil facilities.
 
#9
Tomahawk 6 wrote:

I am saying that it has been US policy to hamstring Iran's ability to fund terror
No it wasn't. This goes back to US policy way pre War on Terror. It has been a policy of the USA since they had their noses rubbed in it in '79, imposed trade sanctions and only incidentally has had the effect you claim for the last few years.

With the oil industry in a poor state of repair I suspect the Russians and Chinese would step in to help modernize the Iranian oil facilities.
And could you blame them for doing so?

The oil is there, states needs influence over its future destination and US of A won't talk to the country in question.

You got a problem with them for strengthening their hand? Again I can't blame them. Smart strategic move in my book.

All in all, USA policy towards Iran hasn't proved too successful has it :?
 
#10
Gen. tomahawk6 US Army retd. said:
I am saying that it has been US policy to hamstring Iran's ability to fund terror. With the oil industry in a poor state of repair I suspect the Russians and Chinese would step in to help modernize the Iranian oil facilities.
A-ha! So, it would be wrong of the Russians or Chinese to invest in an ailing oil infrastructure - in order to stabilise their own supply - but it's OK for the US to invade and occupy?

Moreover, I think you'll find that far, far more Saudi petro-dollars go towards the financing of Islamic terrorism that Iranian ones. The 'Islamist threat' will exist all the time that the US continues to support the House of Saud.
 
#11
So, it would be wrong of the Russians or Chinese to invest in an ailing oil infrastructure
If the Russians had that capability they would not have the problems they have extracting oil in Siberia; nor would Gazprom be at its limits because of collapsing infrastructure causing it to throttle off low-paying customers in Belarus and Ukraine to maintain capacity to the high-paying West European market as it heads rtowards 70% gas-dependency over the coming decade.
 
#12
merkator said:
Gen. tomahawk6 US Army retd. said:
I am saying that it has been US policy to hamstring Iran's ability to fund terror. With the oil industry in a poor state of repair I suspect the Russians and Chinese would step in to help modernize the Iranian oil facilities.
A-ha! So, it would be wrong of the Russians or Chinese to invest in an ailing oil infrastructure - in order to stabilise their own supply - but it's OK for the US to invade and occupy?

Moreover, I think you'll find that far, far more Saudi petro-dollars go towards the financing of Islamic terrorism that Iranian ones. The 'Islamist threat' will exist all the time that the US continues to support the House of Saud.
And Israel!
 
#14
KGB_resident said:
...rezidenturas around the World routinely paid for articles of this sort.
Sergey;

Two of my most trusted agents, codenames MOOSE and SQUIRREL, have brought me the design specifications for an innovative new anti-aircraft cannon, the LePage's Glue Gun.

It is capable of gluing together an entire formation of enemy aircraft in mid-air.

Can you make discrete inquiries with the "right people" as to how much this might be worth to them?

I aspire and expect to adopt a lifestyle of senseless self-indulgence for which my only other present prospect would be to marry Paris Hilton.
 
#15
Not_Whistlin_Dixie said:
KGB_resident said:
...rezidenturas around the World routinely paid for articles of this sort.
Sergey;

Two of my most trusted agents, codenames MOOSE and SQUIRREL, have brought me the design specifications for an innovative new anti-aircraft cannon, the LePage's Glue Gun.

It is capable of gluing together an entire formation of enemy aircraft in mid-air.

Can you make discrete inquiries with the "right people" as to how much this might be worth to them?

I aspire and expect to adopt a lifestyle of senseless self-indulgence for which my only other present prospect would be to marry Paris Hilton.
Alas Not_Whistlin_Dixie the weapon you mentioned alway had been invented into Lubyanka undeground long ago. So I fear it is not so interesting proposition as you may imagine. Btw, SQUIRREL (Natasha, it is her real name) is a very handsome creature.

Not_Whistlin_Dixie said:
Linked article seems to say natural gas production will be diminishing sharply soon.

"Natural Gas: How Big Is The Problem" by Luis de Sousa. 5 December 2006.
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/27/61031/618
Some regions in the World (as North America) will face a fall of gas production but as for Europe...

Europe is yet to go over the peak, and up to now, good neighbours (Algeria and Russia) have been helping sending all the gas asked for. Europe will shortly face its dependency
...
Consumption has been growing at a much sharper pace than Production, which to make matters worse is going into decline.

More good neighbours please.
It should be noted that only one Shtokman gas-field in Barents sea is able to feed the whole Europe many years. Initially it was planned that gas from Shokman would be directed to American market. But recently pres.Putin decided to switch to Europe (including the UK).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6041442.stm

Gazprom's decision to send the bulk of output from its new gas field in the Barents Sea to western Europe has been welcomed by Germany's largest gas firm.
The boss of E.ON Ruhrgas, Burckhard Bergmann, said the move by Russia's gas monopoly was good news for the supply of gas across the continent.

Gazprom had initially said it planned to ship the gas from the Shtokman field to the US.

Mr Bergmann is also a member of Gazprom's board.
...and a good friend.

With most of northern Europe's existing gas supplies coming from current Russian fields and Norway, Mr Bergmann said supplies from Shtokman posed no competition to gas from elsewhere.
 
#16
Mr Bergmann is also a member of Gazprom's board.

...and a good friend.
Don't count on it - E-On had its offices raided by police recently as the EU is about to deal with them and RWE over price-fixing. Gazprom likes to deal with E-On and recently gained a stake in Hungarian gas pipelines through E-On and hoped to get access to more West European pipelines as part of its desire to control the networks.

If the German Govt were forced to stop the generous reserves E-On has been allowed to build for decommissioning nuclear reactors it might be less flush with cash.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top