Where Does China Import Its Energy From (And What This Means For The Petroyuan)

Tyler Durden's picture

Before the "shale revolution" many considered that the biggest gating factor for US economic growth is access to cheap, abundant energy abroad - indeed, US foreign policy around the world and especially in oil rich regions was largely dictated by the simple prerogative of acquiring and securing oil exposure from "friendly" regimes. And while domestic US crude production has soared in recent years, making US reliance on foreign sources a secondary issue (yes, the US is still a major net importer of crude) at least as long as the existing stores of oil at domestic shale sites are not depleted, marginal energy watchers have shifted their attention elsewhere, namely China.

Recall that as we reported in October, a historic event took place late in the year, when China (with 6.3MMbpd) officially surpassed the US (at 6.24MMbpd) as the world's largest importer of oil. China's reliance on imports is likely only to grow: "In 2011, China imported approximately 58 percent of its oil; conservative estimates project that China will import almost two-thirds of its oil by 2015 and three-quarters by 2030."

Which means that the question that most were focused on before, i.e., where the US gets its oil, and what is the US energy strategy, refocuses to China.

We have some answers.

The graphic below summarizes all the known Chinese energy import transit routes.

Some additional color from the 2013 Annual Report to Congress on all key developments relating to China:

China's Energy Strategy


China’s engagement, investment, and foreign construction related to energy continue to grow. China has constructed or invested in energy projects in more than 50 countries, spanning nearly every continent. This ambitious investment in energy assets is driven primarily by two factors. First, China is increasingly dependent upon imported energy to sustain its economy. A net oil exporter until 1993, China remains suspicious of international energy markets. Second, energy projects present a viable option for investing China’s vast foreign currency holdings.


In addition to ensuring reliable energy sources, Beijing hopes to diversify producers and transport options. Although energy independence is no longer realistic for China, given population growth and increasing per capita energy consumption, Beijing still seeks to maintain a supply chain that is less susceptible to external disruption.


In 2011, China imported approximately 58 percent of its oil; conservative estimates project that China will import almost two-thirds of its oil by 2015 and three-quarters by 2030. Beijing looks primarily to the Persian Gulf, Africa, and Russia/Central Asia to satisfy its growing demand, with imported oil accounting for approximately 11 percent of China’s total energy consumption.


A second goal of Beijing’s foreign energy strategy is to alleviate China’s heavy dependence on SLOCs, particularly the South China Sea and the Strait of Malacca. In 2011, approximately 85 percent of China’s oil imports transited the South China Sea and the Strait of Malacca. Separate crude oil pipelines from Russia and Kazakhstan to China illustrate efforts to increase overland supply. A pipeline that would bypass the Strait of Malacca by transporting crude oil from Kyuakpya, Burma to Kunming, China is currently under construction with an estimated completion time of late 2013 or early 2014. The crude oil for this pipeline will be supplied by Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern and African countries.


Given China’s growing energy demand, new pipelines will only slightly alleviate China’s maritime dependency on either the Strait of Malacca or the Strait of Hormuz. Despite China’s efforts, the sheer volume of oil and liquefied natural gas that is imported to China from the Middle East and Africa will make strategic SLOCs increasingly important to Beijing.


In 2011, China imported 14.3 billion cubic meters (bcm) of natural gas, or 46 percent of all of its natural gas imports, from Turkmenistan to China by pipeline via Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. This pipeline is designed to carry 40 bcm per year with plans to expand it to 60 bcm. Another natural gas pipeline designed to deliver 12 bcm per year of Burmese-produced gas is under construction and estimated for completion in late 2013 or early 2014. This pipeline parallels the crude oil pipeline across Burma. Beijing is negotiating with Moscow for two pipelines that could supply China with up to 69 bcm of gas per year; discussions have stalled over pricing differences.

As for China's Top Crude suppliers as of 2011:

Finally, from a previous Zero Hedge post on this topic, here is why China's increasing reliance on Crude imports means that the ascent of the Petroyuan is assured, and why by implication the days of the Petrodollar may be numbered: an outcome which the US will hardly be pleased with.

So what does this shift in oil imports mean?

More than anything else, it is a sign that China will increasingly depend on global markets to satisfy its ever-growing oil demand. This necessitates further engagement with the international system to protect its interests, encouraging a fuller integration with the current liberal order. This will have effects on both China’s approach to its currency and its diplomatic demeanour.  

Derek Scissors wrote last week that this shift might usher in a world where oil is priced in RMB as opposed to solely in USD. This transition could only occur, however, if the RMB was made fully convertible and Beijing steps back from its current policy of exchange rate manipulation. Earlier this year, HSBC predicted that the RMB would be fully convertible by 2017, a reality that is surely hastened by its position as the single largest purchaser of foreign oil. A fully convertible RMB would be a “key step in pushing it as a reserve currency and enhancing its use in global trade, said Sacha Tihanyi, a strategist at Scotia Capital.

On the diplomatic side, while the United States is unlikely to withdraw from its role as defender of global oil production or guarantor of shipping routes, an increasing reliance on foreign oil will push Beijing toward a more engaged role within the international community. It is likely that we will see a change in Beijing’s approach to international intervention and future participation in multilateral counterterrorism initiatives—anything to ensure global stability. In the future, anything that destabilizes the oil market will increasingly harm China more than the United States. While Beijing views this increased import reliance as a strategic weakness, it a boon for those hoping to see Beijing grow into its role as a global leader.

Bottom line: as Chinese oil imports grow, Beijing will become increasingly reliant on the current market-oriented global system—this is nothing but good news for those that enjoy the status quo.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
hedgeless_horseman's picture



Where Does China Import Its Energy From?

Not through Afghanistan.

The REAL Reason for the longest war in American history?

superflex's picture

It sure is funny how all of our military bases are along the proposed pipeline route and the former VP of pipeline operations for Chevron is now the Preezy of Pipelineistan.

hedgeless_horseman's picture




Otherwise, it is a long way by sea, through a couple of narrow
straits that can easily be defended with a couple of [American] carrier groups.


We damn sure did not invade a soverign nation, Afghanistan, and are
still occupying it after more than 12 years, because a now deceased
Saudi Arabian was hiding there.  Did we invade Pakistan when this very
same Saudi Arabian was allegedly hiding out there?  No.  That wouldn't
make sense, would it?  Allegedly, we sent a SEAL team into the sovereign
nation of Pakistan to kill Osama, not capture him, eventhough he was
unarmed and out numbered, then we immediately dumped his body into the
ocean instead of questioning this terrorist mastermind about future
terrorist attacks.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

BINGO!  Now THAT is what you call one smart, insightful observation.  The kind we expect from ZH and its only "blogging Tyler".

LawsofPhysics's picture

"These are not the droids you are looking for, move along, move along-"

WTFx10's picture

Osama got the ultimate double cross

CrashisOptimistic's picture

Well, wait a minute.

China's domestic oil production is not vibrant.  It's likely nearing or past Peak.  More importantly, so is Iran's.

That last fact sort of undoes the theory.

hedgeless_horseman's picture



There is still oil in the Persian Gulf.  China would like to have this oil, as it is the world's largest consumer of it.  Pipelines are cheaper than tankers. 

These are facts, not theories.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

For those who remember that before we invaded Afghanistan, our oilmen and the CIA tried to arm-twist the Taliban (whom the Al-CIA-dah armed and supported against the Russians), to get pipelines from their northern neighbors, through Afghanistan and into Pakistan.  The goal was to (a) screw the Russians and (b) prevent an Chinese-Iranian pipeline being built.

Clearly the Taliban was more persuaded by the Chinese/Iranian offering than the Exxon-Al-CIA-dah offering, or we would not have had to attack them.

And for what it’s worth, Iran does not hate Israel.  Actually they couldn’t give a shit about Israel – like most of the world.  It is Israel – and its Settler-backed, expansionist Likud – that hates Iran.  Were it not for Iran providing help to the Palestinians (via Iraq), these would have been pushed aside even faster by the Settlers (praying to Elohim) and pushing out Semitic Palestinians (praying to Allah). 

The other sovereign that also hates Iran is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) of course.  They are natural enemies on the basis of competing religions and petro-energy.  Not only are the Saudis the cornerstone for the Petro-dollar (and thus the MIC), but they are also a shareholder of the US Fed – given that they own a controlling share of CITI bank.

When framed in this basic context/model, motives and developments suddenly become crystal clear.  The problem is that this would not sell well to 90% of the US public, so a “modified” version has to be pitched to them via the MSM, Madison Avenue and Hollywood.

I think I speak for the majority here on ZH that, in the end, The Truth Will (win) Out.


boogerbently's picture

I believe this is why China is in negotiations with the WH to buy South Dakota and Montana.

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture


A major reason for the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was the building of a pipeline through the country that would take natural gas from Turkmenistan to India and Pakistan. Canada and the other 44 Western countries occupying Afghanistan are supporting this U.S. objective by bolstering Washington’s military position in the country.


Since then, the U.S. has persuaded India, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, and Afghanistan to sign an agreement aimed at constructing the pipeline, but the war in Afghanistan and the U.S.’s failure to defeat the Taliban stalled actual work on this project. Washington’s occupation of Afghanistan and pipeline plans are part of its strategy to gain control of Central Asia’s and the Caspian Sea area’s energy riches and divert them away from Russia, China, and Iran.



disabledvet's picture

Why would the USA want to do this? Sure...it might make sense now now that we're a huge energy producer...but that sure seems like a weird plan going back to 2001. China went all in on heavy metal...not oil...as well. This created a HUGE bubble in the metals space as "solar tech" became the "answer." Well, it has become "the answer" all right. All but oil has collapsed in price. "You don't own it...it's not yours." We've been making hand held fuel cells that can power a battery for months. And I've get a cell phone that can't hold a charge for more than a day? I say "not for much longer."

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

Keep in mind the article was written in 2010 but here is another very salient point from it to understand the bigger picture.

Recently, the U.S.’s Turkmen-Afghan pipeline plans have suffered what appears to be a fatal blow. On January 6, Turkmenistan committed its entire gas exports to China, Russia, and Iran with the inauguration of the Dauletabad-Sarakhs-Khangiran (DSK) pipeline which connects Iran's northern Caspian area with Turkmenistan.

As Bhadrakumar explains, Turkmenistan “has no urgent need of the pipelines that the United States and the European Union have been advancing.” The operation of the DSK pipeline, along with the launching of another one between China and Turkmenistan in December 2009, has “virtually redrawn the energy map of Eurasia and the Caspian,” he maintains. “We are witnessing a new pattern of energy cooperation at the regional level that dispenses with Big Oil [private Western multinational oil companies]. Russia traditionally takes the lead. China and Iran follow the example. Russia, Iran, and Turkmenistan hold, respectively, the world's largest, second-largest, and fourth-largest gas reserves. And China will be consumer par excellence in this century. The matter is of profound consequence to U.S. global strategy.”


The US pulling out of Afghanistan has a secondary underlying long term objective now since the minute the US leaves you can bet the Taliban me banana and other Islamic fundamentalist nutjobs will be set loose on Turkmenistan to sabotage said pipelines along with regime destablizing tactics. Russia is basically going to be forced back into Afghanistan and Turkmenistan to protect those gas fields. Old wounds that aren't fully healed are reopened in more than one way....


Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

And another salient point from the article


The Financial Times commented last week that the pipeline “deals a blow to the European Union’s plans to win Turkmen supplies for the planned Nabucco pipeline.”

This pipeline is the U.S.’s and E.U.’s attempt at breaking Russia’s dominant role as the leading energy supplier to Europe. Nabucco depends mainly on getting gas from Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. However, Russia now wants to double its consumption of Azerbaijani gas, and Iran is also becoming a consumer of this gas, further reducing supplies for Nabucco.



Look at map specifically


It becomes real apparent geographically how Russia has basically forced checkmate for the Nabucco pipeline. EU is forced into the Nabucco being supplied by Qatar and Russia has that cock blocked also with Syria. The only route left on land is Qatar through Iraq either through the Persian Gulf to Iraq or on land through Saudi Arabia first. If the Russians cut a deal with Qatar and can back it up militarily connecting Qatar through the Strait of Hormuz into Iran and into the pipeline system feeding China it is game over for EU and US as far as control goes in that region.

It is not AIPAC and Israel that is coordinating all the vitrol at Assad regardless of what everyone thinks, its the EU, the Germans know the game is up and are in the process if they haven't already switched teams the rest of the EU will follow once they come out of the closet except for maybe France.

The assholes in the EU play checkers while the Russians play chess in the worldwide game or RISK.

CrashisOptimistic's picture

Always wise to inject into these discussions the critical truth:

Anything else you bring out of the ground and use . . . still exists.  Iron ore, copper, it's still in existence.

Burn oil and gas and it's gone.  These infinity perspectives for this stuff are suicidal.

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

It takes energy to get it out of the ground, to manufacture it, to fix it, to recycle it, to use it if it refined into a tool to do work so on and so forth.

The balance of power shifts for another 50 - 100 years or so until the gas fields are sucked dry and then the game begins again until they figure out how to harness solar and store it in a way that breaks the whole system or some other black swan energy alternative becomes prevalent that they can't centralize and control at the expense of localities.

FeralSerf's picture

It's not the EU, except due to the influence of Big Oil.

Big Oil, especially BP, is the loser from Iranian energy being available.

Urban Redneck's picture

Don't rely on Wikipedia for the whole picture, some of the backers of Nabucco are quite adept at chess themselves.

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

The article in wikipedia wasn't what I was trying to illustrate just the geography around where the pipeline is situated so people can see it visually.

There still is one major gas field in play for Nabucco but it isn't on land.


The largest chunk of it lies in Cyprus but extends into Turkish, Greek and Israeli waters. This the Russians can't maneuver into and control so easily. The EU beating on Cyprus and Greece is not just for banking and financial reasons. It won't matter though if the Germans go over to the BRICS, the EU either falls apart and a war breaks out that in that region over that field led by Israel and various former EU factions or it goes to the Russians by default to develop if the EU doesn't fall apart since by default the balance of power has to shift for the whole Union then a war breaks out in the region led by Israel except this time they are fighting the whole EU instead.

The Russians don't even have to get involved, the Muslims will be itching to get into the scrap plus it will give Israel a pretense to go after Iran and/or Syria at the same time once Hezbollah or someone similiar decides to attack Israel once the fun starts.

Mark my words war breaks out in this region once the Germans bail out.




Urban Redneck's picture

Money and power make strange and queer bedfellow among the elite. Everyone gets their share and then they can find both the land and gas fields.

But I don't think Qatar would pump gas through Iran, and of course there's the whole stability of the geological divide between between South Pars and North Dome, so whose gas would really be pumped to whom? But if he wants to pump gas beyond the capacity of the GTL build-out the Emir can always dust off GUSA and bypass both Iran and Afghanistan and have only the Pakistanis as middlemen (and less gas consumers after all the nuke plants the Chinese conveniently "offered" to build) between themselves and the Forbidden City customers. Which of course would be competition for the IP pipeline, freeing up gas supply for Nabucco.

I have faith that TPTB can find a resolution for the local issues in the bathtub, once they come to an understanding on everyone's "fair share" (or they'll have a giant glass blowing contest and it won't really matter). Carving up Europe, not so much - precisely because of the Germans and the larger European fetish for ignoring both the writing on the wall and the 800lb gorilla in the room.

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

if he wants to pump gas beyond the capacity of the GTL build-out the Emir can always dust off GUSA and bypass both Iran and Afghanistan and have only the Pakistanis as middlemen (and less gas consumers after all the nuke plants the Chinese conveniently "offered" to build) between themselves and the Forbidden City customers. Which of course would be competition for the IP pipeline, freeing up gas supply for Nabucco.

Just so people can visualize the Gulf South Asia pipeline. There is a picture of the route here


Once you get into Pakistan you are back to the same problem how do you get it out of Pakistan and into the Nabucco pipeline system?

You can go north into Afghanistan but you are cockblocked there by the former Soviet Union stans.

You have to still go through Iran and that ain't happening with the Iran and the Iran-Pakistan aka Peace natural gas pipeline not being hooked into Nabucco. Besides why would the Iranians allow Qatar to pump gas from the South Pars field into Pakistan and then use their pipeline that the Iranians are fueling pumping gas into from the same field. The only way it might happen is if GUSA only provides LNG gas but then unless I am mistaken all new infrastructure has to be created to push 2 different types of natural gas through the system.

If Qatari gas goes through Iran or Pakistan it is going east towards China and it is total game over for the EU if that happens unless it happens to be LNG but that only helps the countries in the EU who rely heavily on LNG gas like Great Britain and if you can only pump one type of gas through the pipeline at a time takes it out of the running for Nabucco as a feeder source.

Urban Redneck's picture

The only people at the table who don't relish a good negotiation are the Americans (because of their force projection capacities). The producers have greed on their side and markets on either side (China or the EU). Everyone loves pipelines (as long as it's THEIR pipeline), but the pipeline is just a revenue stream into stream into State coffers and a tactical asset to promote State influence.

In regards to China, once they reach Pakistan, China is a done deal since Asians have a fetish for land bridges (the Chinese started with the Stillwell Road rehab and incorporating a pipeline into Silk Road 2.0 (the brick & mortar version) is a relatively simple obstacle to overcome, assuming they actually build the nuke plants in Pakistan, since the US was promising power plants 20 years ago before Clinton started US-Pakistani relations down the road to hell (but it can't really be that long ago, since that would imply I've aged over 20 years).

GUSA won't be built precisely because a pipeline to Europe will, but the real threat is a useful negotiating tool, and just as Pakistan is a clusterfuck of conflicts on the road to feeding Chinese industry, Turkey is a clusterfuck of conflicts on the the road to fueling and heating Europe. Turkey and Russia have issues, Turkey and Kurdistan have issues, somedays Turkey seems to want go beyond NATO and jump into bed with Brussels, other days not so much. Russian militarization, desire for control of the spice trade, and history with Turkey, as well as Turkey's ongoing flirtation with Brussels and its own desire to re-establish control of the spice trade appear to be insurmountable obstacles to a monogamous relationship with Moscow.

Once a pipeline stretches from Europe to Turkey, there are a number of options, Iran and Kurdistan being the most easily achievable (now that a resurrection of the pre-Gulbenkian black spice trade route seems of the table), but since the same people who are financing destabilization along the Mediterranean coast are financing destabilization of the central government in Baghdad, if they achieve victory on either front then they have wide and clear path to bring gas from the western side of the Gulf up to Turkey.

(Just my .02, and Iraq is the place I have the least insight, currently, as I walked away once the Americans torpedoed the labor force participation rate shortly after arriving...)

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

One other point on Nabucco from the wikipedia article. Besides the Aphrodite gas field.

The potential suppliers for original Nabucco project were considered to be Iraq, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Egypt.

Azerbaijan is still in play though the Azerbaijan-Georgia-Romania Interconnector probably takes them out as potential supply source since that is a competing pipeline for the same gas fields difference is this one is for LNG gas which is advantageous to the Russians in taking control of Qatar's dominance in supply of LNG to the EU.

Iraq is still too unstable and we would have to keep troops in there so it is probably out now considering the public doesn't have the stomach for war in the middle east anymore.

Turkmenistan is out if anyone read the root article.

Leaves us with Egypt. The only infrastructure they currently have to hook into Nabucco is the Arab Gas Pipeline. We know where that one routes through, Syria. So that is dead end right now also.

By default unless there is another sizeable gas field, Aphrodite gas field is it.

Urban Redneck's picture

I think the bigger obstacle to Iraq is actually Turkey, since almost 90% of the gas reserves are in Kurdistan. Where's Abu Nuwas when you need a good poem about Barzani and Erdogan, sitting in a tree...

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture

Without a doubt that the Turks don't like the Kurds is an understatement. The only way Iraq works without the US playing referee in Iraq is if the place is run by a iron fisted dictator like Saddam Hussein who is willing to genocide a few Kurds on the sly to appease the Turks whether he actually dislikes the Kurds or not.

The minute the US walks out of Iraq it is going back into the Habbi Hatfield vs Mohammed McCoy Shia/Sunni my Islam dick is bigger than yours cockfight and old tribal divisions cockfights that predate Islam without someone with a bigger stick to keep all sides from misbehaving.

Dewey Cheatum Howe's picture


The energy relations between Iran and Pakistan are a marriage made in heaven, except for international politics.



TEHRAN  - An Iranian deputy oil minister called on India to join an under-construction pipeline projected to carry natural gas from Iran to Pakistan.
Ali Majedi, who is a deputy minister for international and commercial affairs, said Iran expects India to overcome its doubts and join the pipeline, previously known as Peace Pipeline, reported FARS news agency. “If India joins the pipeline, the interests of all three countries - Pakistan, India and Iran - will be guaranteed,” he said.
“Given the initial design of the Peace Pipeline, even China can join this pipeline,” he said.


Cue Paki Bin Laden and you know the rest of the story. The gears are shifting.


Skateboarder's picture

Pakistan was once India, before borders were drawn. Old vedic temples still lie in the Islamic nation. In time borders will be redrawn.

Iwanttoknow's picture


The only indigeneous religion to come out of India is Buddism.Hinduism is as much an import as Islam.The first king to unite India was Asokha,a buddhist.India was broken by two Rothchild agents,Moutbatten and Nehru.However I still grant you your final prognostication that the borders will be redrawn.

Skateboarder's picture

The Indus river, and primarily its roots in the Tibetan mountains, gave life to the Vedic traditions that had as much to do with animal sacrifice as everyone else on the planet at the time. Hindiusm is one of the main of Vedic subtraditions that broke away from animal sacrifice and replaced it with easy-to-repeat and cleaner metaphorical acts of ritual (like throwing rice or butter into a fire). The key feature of Hindiusm is physical ritual (and a worship of idols as proxy of the gods). Buddhism split from Vedic tradition in pursuit of more abstract rituals (while keeping some important physical ones from its Vedic roots), some with rules and some without (yoga, and meditation, respectively).

Islam was a pure import into old India. Vedic thought was the original. Hinduism - the first major branch, Buddhism - the second major branch.

Completely agree on the evils that Moutbatten and Nehru perpetrated. The lines will indeed be redrawn.

earleflorida's picture

"Bush signs India Nuclear Law"       12/18/06* WPO by Peter Baker

(present status; not signatory to NPT nor IAEA inspection of Military Reactor sites)    



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference      (Note:  WWII)

Ps. India condemned the USA for Japan's involvment in WWII and cast a condescending vote when the SE Asian Conference was held without US participation. Note: The US helped India, but the hatred of British colonialization for centuries via its close alliance to the American's could not put 'Humpty Dumpty' back together again-- thus the 30 plus years of US/ India enmities or long 'Bugbearism?!? 

thankyou Tyler

earleflorida's picture

try again:     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Conference_on_Afghanistan,_Bonn_(2001)  

again USSA tells Iran to fuck-off

Bush the war criminal!


Winston Churchill's picture

Pure happenstance I'm sure, Hedgeless.

Pipelines  couldn't have anything to do with it.

Just like back in the 1970s, the Russians built and maintained the North South Roads,

and the US did the same for the east west ones.

THe poor Afghanis are always in someones way.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

"The poor Afghanis are always in someones way."  is THE perfect way to become filthy rich.

That's how cities and civilizations were built:  Along trade routes (land, rivers or sea).

Someone needs to unite these Afghan tribes into one nation, into one national cartel, by showing them that they can make a fuck of a lot more money from being a trade route than a blood and poppy route.

Even if the Iranians and Chinese could convince them, then the US (and Israel) would be so pissed, that they'd find a way to prolong the real conflict as a fake conflict:  Special Ops dressed up as Rebels/Insurgents and blowing up pipe lines.

rainingFrogs's picture

the new geopolitics of the middle-east are really beginning to crystalize. Russia cuts a $1.5B/month oil for goods deal w/ Iran. China setting up petroyuan deals. Saudis have tantrum when US doesn't play attack dog on Syria.  Israel calls Kerry a buffoon.  Karzai would cut a deal between Iran and China in a heartbeat to install pipelineistan through Afghanistan for a piece of the action.  the US has no friends, and is being outmaneuvered by China and Russia.

LawsofPhysics's picture

The only "good" news being in reality the Russians will still do what's right for Russian and have no more respect for China than the U.S.  The world has been "centralizing" for a while now, personally, I think we could stand a little decentralizing for a change.  The only people who have anything to worry about are the useless paper-pushing middlemen.  Fuck em, they have been overcompensated for quite some time now.

mt paul's picture

oil, opium ,scape goats



what's not to love..

NoWayJose's picture

Looking at the map, it is easy to see why China is building aircraft carriers...

gwar5's picture

Pretty well diversified but didn't see any domestic source on the list. Only listed external suppliers? Because I thought China had at least a little domestic offshore going on.




disabledvet's picture

What matters is coal from Mongolia. That's it. I think this is the end for "oil" as a monetarily decisive "resource." There's too much diversification now...let alone outright production.

CrashisOptimistic's picture

Dood, you just consistently get everything, and I mean everything, wrong.

China pumps, from onshore sources, about 4.5 million bpd.  And there's not a single bulldozer in the world that runs on solar power.  Never will be, either.

thefirstabomb's picture


China is a bubble waiting to pop. that said, they are still far more forward-thinking than the dunces running the USA. 

syntaxterror's picture

Petroyuan. Wasn't that a dinosaur?

U4 eee aaa's picture

This really is great news. Knowing that the world has China by the energy short hairs should make them a kinder, more humble superpower. Let us hope that all those scientists they pump out every year don't come up with an alternate home grown way to fuel their war machine

energy shortages = peace!

CrashisOptimistic's picture


Energy shortages mean war has to sequence up the conflict spectrum much more rapidly to low oil demanding weaponry, like ICBMs with nuclear warheads.  They require no oil.

U4 eee aaa's picture

Not extreme energy shortages. Just the type that make it very expensive to run an on the ground (or in the water) war machine

BlackVoid's picture

China is running primarily on coal, while the US is running mostly on oil.

This is a big deal. Losing oil imports for China would be bad of course but not catastrophic. Losing oil imports for the US is armageddon.

CrashisOptimistic's picture

What the HELL are you talking about?

China pumps 4.5 million bpd from their oil fields and imports 6.5 million bpd.  Consumption is 11ish million bpd.  You think they shrug off an oil loss?