Article

2007-11-14 Home Front Economy

No need for more oil now, OPEC tells U.S

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Delphi 2007-11-14 08:27|| || Front Page|| [13 views ] Top

#1 Delphi, your recollection regarding Cuban oil drilling is correct. The countries bordering the Gulf of Mexico each have exclusionary economic zones extending hundreds of miles offshore or until they reach a point equidistant from another country (IIRC there is a small donut hole in the middle of the Gulf that is not clearly subject to anyone.) So Cuba can drill for oil, subject to Cuban state and federal laws, to within about 45 miles of Florida (in places) but on the American side of that line, subject to Florida and US rules (mostly environmental - and mostly bogus) nobody can drill even 500 miles offshore of Florida (in a different direction).

Interesting rhetoric out of Kalifornia today with similarly contorted logic. Because some ship ran into a bridge pier and leaked a bunch of oil into San Francisco Bay they want to ban tankers from bringing oil into the Bay. 1. I think it was fuel oil for powering the ship, not crude, that spilled - are they asking that all ship traffic be banned? 2. Several critical oil refineries are located on the Bay - and cannot be supplied fully except via ships through the Bay: If they think gas prices there are high now, just watch what happens when they cut half their supply. 3) I think a bunch of that oil comes from Alaska and is not legally allowed to be diverted to other markets, so those ships would have to go all the way around the continent to unload for refining in Texas or Louisiana - adding a substantial shipping cost increase, which of course is passed on to the user. All demagoguery for the ignorant masses.

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2007-11-14 13:10|| 2007-11-14 13:10|| Front Page Top

#2 Glenmore, you are correct that it was bunker oil from a container ship...about 2 - 3 swimming pool's worth. Nasty but not a catastrophe.

Every tanker that comes into the Bay has a tug escorting it. While there may be enviro-crazies that say we should have no tanker traffic, that just is not going to happen, for the reasons you state.

Posted by remoteman 2007-11-14 15:48|| 2007-11-14 15:48|| Front Page Top

#3 (IIRC there is a small donut hole in the middle of the Gulf that is not clearly subject to anyone.)

Subject to the whims of the USN. There's also one in the Gulf of Alaska.

Posted by Thomas Woof 2007-11-14 16:48|| 2007-11-14 16:48|| Front Page Top

#4 I thought the Saudis, at least, had been pumping at maximum capacity for a while? And Venzuelan production, due to the neglected state of their equipment, has been falling for a while, Iranian ditto... While Iraqi production has been increasing, it's not as quickly as planned because of vandalism, and it will take a while for the newly discovered oil fields around the world to come on line, as I understand it.

It may be that OPEC cannot provide more oil. What say you, O Rantburg Experts?

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2007-11-14 19:50|| 2007-11-14 19:50|| Front Page Top

#5 TOPIX > Saudis in favor of keeping prices at US$60.00 a barrel.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-11-14 23:30|| 2007-11-14 23:30|| Front Page Top

23:58 JosephMendiola
23:54 gorb
23:54 JosephMendiola
23:48 JosephMendiola
23:42 twobyfour
23:41 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:38 JosephMendiola
23:30 JosephMendiola
23:20 Frank G
23:19 trailing wife
23:18 gorb
23:18 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:18 zazz
23:16 trailing wife
23:15 Sherry
23:00 Alaska Paul in Fairbanks
23:00 McZoid
22:50 GK
22:21 Gabby Cussworth
22:20 DMFD
22:16 doc
21:49 Eric Jablow
21:41 Eric Jablow
21:32 Eric Jablow