This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Saudi Arabia Pumps Record 9.8 Million Barrels/Day In March

Tyler Durden's picture


According to the latest OPEC data, Saudi Arabia, which in its own view, is some endless pool of easily retrievable crude, yet which Phibro's Andy Hall, as well as leaked confidential docs, claim is nothing but one big lie, pumped a record 9.834 million barrels per day, an increase of just 24K barrels from February's total (based on secondary market data, not direct communication). While we salute Saudi's peak production, which has never crossed over the 10 MMBPD level, we wonder, just how and where will Saudi get the 25% extra spare crude capacity needed to fully replace Iran's embargoed oil, which however continues to flow. Or it does at least according to Iran - oil production rose in February and March, if just redirected: India and certainly China (which is currently adding to its strategic reserves as pointed out here some time ago) are delighted to buy excess Iran production. Based on secondary market sources, Iran production has declined from 3.46MM BPD to 3.35MM BPD: hardly much of an "embargo" impact.

Below is Iran's production over the years compared to the price of Brent. Needless to say, Obama would certainly demand more from his bossom friends in the house of Saud, in an election year... if only they could deliver.

And this is where Saudi Arabia says it can pump to. At this point they may be the only ones who believe it.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:33 | 2355347 Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

That is called "Making hay while the sun shines".

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:35 | 2355354 Bazinga
Bazinga's picture

or perhaps they were burning the midnight oil?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:18 | 2356140 The trend is yo...
The trend is your friend's picture

The US and Europe just shot themselves in the foot by trying to embargo a sought after commodity.  This will only them more hostile towards Iran.  Come hell or high water we're going to war with them within 12 months

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:34 | 2355538 SRSrocco
SRSrocco's picture


I see the world has been put back into a trance now that the Saudi's have produced a so-called record amount of oil.  However nice this looks on paper, they are exporting a WHOLE LOT LESS than they were 30 years ago.

According to 2011 BP Statistical Review, Saudi Arabia produced about 10 mbd in 1980 but only consumed about 600,000 barrels per day.  Today with their RECORD production of say 10 mbd, they now consume 2.8 mbd of their own production.

So... the Saudis are actually only exporting 7.2 mbd today whereas they exported 2.2 mbd more or a total of 9.4 mbd 30 years ago.

The world and especially the USA does not want to SWALLOW PEAK oil, because they want to continue driving around all day in their SUVS, buying crap they don't need and drinking coffee from Starbucks at $3 a cup

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:37 | 2355587 gookempucky
gookempucky's picture

Thanks for the stats SRS---also keep in mind folks that the drop off in real peak production as per the chart 1979-80 led to the beginning of salt water injection process's and by a miracle the production levels went back to par.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:06 | 2355614 SRSrocco
SRSrocco's picture

gookempucky....SPOT ON.

Very few understand the challenges the Saudis are having in keeping production from their 50+ year old oil fields.  They are pumping MILLIONS OF BARRELS of SEAWATER a day into their oil fields to keep oil coming out of the ground.  The water cut percentage keeps rising and when it gets to a certian level they shut in that well and drill another horizontal well above it.

This technique provides the world with much needed crude, but it does so by KILLING THE LIFESPAN OF THE OIL FIELD.  I would imagine one day... production will just fall off a cliff in the kingdom of Saud.

Then the reality of PEAK OIL will be slapped across the forehead of those who did not believe.


Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:24 | 2355725 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

yup, all they're doing is accelerating the peak timeline

God has a SICK sense of humor. Wait, is there a difference?

Thu, 04/19/2012 - 00:50 | 2357084 BlackholeDivestment
BlackholeDivestment's picture

...what happens when H2o combines with pressure, heat and carbon/orgainc(s)?

goto 26:00 in video

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:38 | 2355590 I think I need ...
I think I need to buy a gun's picture

put the pieces together i come up with enough oil thru 2013 so obama can get re-elected thru a dollar devaluation. 2013 when there is no oil and 10 gas is a big problem

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:30 | 2355735 Metalredneck
Metalredneck's picture

I wish you guys had the election in the spring.  I hate the thought of my net worth crashing in winter, when I realize that my garden should be bigger.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:06 | 2355678 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture


in this case you may allow for a exception to your rule, as Iran might be said to be having it's cake and eating it too!

The strong growth of automobile manufacturing in Iran throughout the last decade is in stark contrast to the declining sales and channel stuffing of the capitalist roader economies(Iran is the middle easts' biggest carmaker)...the availability of unsold oil inventory is a spur to boosting domestic sales and the manufacturing base by keeping fuel prices low for the home market. 

Meanwhiles, state owned Khodro is expanding overseas production in places like Venezuela, Argentina, Egypt and other African markets, Azerbaijan, Syria,  and stands to make serious inroads in the burgeoning Turkish market.

I luv reading the comments from the chin-dribbling scriptoids who would have us believe that Iran is some kind of camel-powered desert day soon enough in their centrally planned 'western paradise'  aka Obamanation, they'll be dreaming of being able to afford a Samand, while Merica's carmaking lines will be reserved for producing black Stalinist style sedans for the potentates of state power to parade around in.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:20 | 2355714 SRSrocco
SRSrocco's picture


First of all, I am not apart of the BEAT IRAN INTO THE GROUND MENTALITY.  Secondly, they are also experiencing the same problems that are plaguing Saudi Arabia:


1975 = produced 6 mbd

1975 = consumed approximately 800,000 bpd

2011 = produced 4.2 mbd

2011 = consumed approximately 2 mbd

Thus, IRAN exported about 5.2 mbd in 1975, but are only exporting 2.2-2.3 mbd today.



Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:27 | 2355729 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

aren't most producing nations. Tends to happen when your population grows and their standard of consumption grows too

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:35 | 2355743 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture

Relax Big Fella, I was not linking you to the dribbler scribblers in the least...just tacking on a note about the many times I've seen such comments passed here to your credible observation about the silver lining to reduced exports stands....and I offer this modification of your rule:


Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:36 | 2355746 SRSrocco
SRSrocco's picture


Just when I finishing editing my comment, my access was denied.  The 2011 figures are actually for 2010.  Here is an update:


2010 = produced 4.2 mbd

2010 = consumed 1.8 mbd

2012 = produced 3.4 mbd

2012 = estimated consumption at 2 mbd

In 2010, net exports for IRAN were 2.4 mbd, however today they are estimated to be approximately 1.4-1.5 mbd.

The world NET EXPORTS may fall off a cliff within the end of the decade.


Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:34 | 2355747 malikai
malikai's picture

I said it before, and I'll say it again. Nothing destroys oil dimand in a country like war. Iranian and eventually Saudi consumption will be cut appropriately when we bring them 'freedom'.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:10 | 2355683 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

I just want to see how long they can keep this rate up.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:19 | 2355713 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

+1 for the export land model.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:36 | 2355356 Death and Gravity
Death and Gravity's picture

Saudi Arabia, not Iran, in the last sentence, surely?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:53 | 2355364 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture



USA is ramping it up, too.  We need to party like it is 1998...


And look at Texas!!!!



There has never been a better time
to buy or lease
a new Chevy Suburban!
10 City / 15 Hwy

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:56 | 2355409 MunX
MunX's picture

WW3 will use a lot of oil  :)

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:54 | 2355410 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

+ 1  Nice


PUMP, bitchez!

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:17 | 2355524 jus_lite_reading
jus_lite_reading's picture

I got you beat-- Nissan Titan 4x4 FlexFuel 9MPG city 13MPG hghway

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:51 | 2355638 SRSrocco
SRSrocco's picture

Hey Horsemen... could you be so kind to give me the details on how you produce pictures or graphs in the comment section?

Or is it a big TRADE SECRET?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:25 | 2355727 12ToothAssassin
12ToothAssassin's picture

You must be a ZH contributor for image tags to work in comments

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:41 | 2355366 Jacque Itch
Jacque Itch's picture

Peak oil and my 10 inch schlong... the 2 big lies of today

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:54 | 2355407 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

Jacque Itch

How odd. I'm actually oiling the peak of my 10 inch schlong.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:56 | 2355420 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

Gully, a belated "thank you" for posting the link to the clip from "On the Beach" a week or so ago.

We rented the movie from Netflix, yes, very depressing, but an excellent film.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:06 | 2355467 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture


Did I?

While I do welcome thanks, I refuse to take credit for someone elses actions.

Especially if it brings enlightenment to another.

Have you ever seen Giant? All about Texas and oil. Book is better.

Besides Jett Rink rocks.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:32 | 2355978 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

I've seen "Giant" twice.  Recently I took my wife down the the FL Keys.  We spent a night in Key Largo, and the place we stayed had "Key Largo" on a CD, so FINALLY got around to seeing THAT film.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:15 | 2355505 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Yes, this adds tremendously to the credibility of the peak oil death worship cult argument.


Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:53 | 2355826 easypoints
easypoints's picture

The planet follows certain laws. Gravity, thermodynamics, and other physics. "Worshiping" and "arguing" are not among them. Those are very human. It's difficult to debate the fact that the planet's resources are supplying a young, man-made economic system that requires infinite growth. So, when asking if that is sustainable, would you question the credibility of the man-made system, or the planet?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:45 | 2356019 tmosley
tmosley's picture

You presume two things:

A. that the "economic system" requires infinite growth

B.  that men can not change man made systems

Wrong on both counts.  The "economic system" doesn't need infinite growth, the government and central bankers do to perpetuate their ponzi scheme.  But no-one thinks that ponzis can last forever.  This one has simply lasted longer than most because it has coincided with several productivity revolutions.  And the man made system is only frozen in place on fossil fuel consumption because of overbearing government regulations forbidding the implimentation of alternatives, whether they be standard nukes, or super safe LFTRs that burn abundent, clean thorium.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:24 | 2356161 easypoints
easypoints's picture

You are correct about economics, but the growth in population is clearly exponential. Any economic system would still require more and more resources every year. Abundant energy/resources creates growth in EVERY system, be it bacteria in a petri-dish, bird populations on an island, or our global eocnomy. Take it away and the growth must end. Over-shoot the resource peak,  and there must be a decline in population, unless you find a new resource.

You say that alternatives are being repressed by the government and oil companies. Of course they are. But what new technology is so spectacular?

Most importantly, peak oil is a LIQUID fuel problem, not an electricity problem. Thorium and LFTR could replace the gas tanks of cars (if you can mine the materials for hundreds of millions of lithium batteries), but it does nothing for the paint, tires, and asphault roads... or the petrolium used in plastic, cosmeics, chemicals, and other products that are literally everywhere around you.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:40 | 2355367 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

The usa hates dictatorships. LMAO!!

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:49 | 2355369 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

The Saudi Oil reserves are like the Gold in Ft. Knox...

Subject to Government propaganda.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:54 | 2355411 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture


At least the reserves aren't full of Tungsten.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:15 | 2355503 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

True but they are full of BS.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:40 | 2355598 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture


so a Biogas market then?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:41 | 2355371 taniquetil
taniquetil's picture

Clearly, speculators are to blame.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:42 | 2355372 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

Why not go for Whale Oil?!
Where are the Japanese when you need them?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:55 | 2355418 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

Sudden Debt

"Where are the Japanese when you need them?"

Dying slow deaths from radiation sickness.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:46 | 2355613 yabyum
yabyum's picture

It is tough to sneak up on the behemoths when you glow in the dark. And daylight too.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:44 | 2355377 jefe95
jefe95's picture

Hat Tip Bernanke.


Funny how much oil you can produce when the ppbl goes up.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:10 | 2355909 Vagabond
Vagabond's picture

It's not the price per barrel going up that has the US producing more.  It's the lower EROI that has made drilling in the US make sense economically once again.  There just isn't as much cheap oil out there anymore, so it's time to go after some of our more expensive-to-drill reserves.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:50 | 2355389 e-recep
e-recep's picture

Pushing Iran out of the game has a price. Arabic muppets at work.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:02 | 2355454 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

There are others leaving the game.  Take a very close look at the reasons why Kirchner grabbed YPF from Repsol.  Specifically, look at Argentina's oil production decline, traversing multiple governments.  

They are going dry.  While you're at it, have a look at Indonesia's trend, too.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:50 | 2355393 flacorps
flacorps's picture

A shift toward natural gas as a fuel (or better yet, ammonia which can be made from natural gas and in many other ways, including electrolyzing water) would do a lot to keep 'em honest.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:57 | 2355425 MunX
MunX's picture

We can do much better.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:59 | 2355432 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Endless reserves of bullshit!

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:58 | 2355434 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



SUSRISblog | April 18, 2012

The GCC Challenge in Missile Defense

Two weeks ago U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Saudi Arabia for bilateral talks with King Abdullah and other leaders in the Kingdom. She also participated in the inaugural US-GCC Strategic Cooperation Forum while in Riyadh. Among the short list of topics on Clinton's agenda for discussion at the forum, during a time of high anxiety over issues like Iran and Syria, was the preparedness of America's Gulf allies in the area of missile defense. As tensions in the Gulf over Tehran's nuclear program reach new heights the United States and its Gulf partners are more mindful than ever of the ballistic missile threat posed by Iran.

A State Department official briefing the press enroute to Saudi Arabia identified missile defense among the key topics for discussion, "We’re working with each of our partners to develop that architecture because in order to protect the Gulf, no one nation can protect itself. It needs to rely on its partners in order to have an effective missile defense system." A second briefer noted, "it’s something.. ..appropriate for the GCC as a regional organization. Since missile defense requires a regional approach, it’s an appropriate topic to be discussed and addressed."

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:02 | 2355447 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



this should keep the Brent WTI Spread: 20.77 for Apr 10 2012 at a more than reasonable amoiunt..

I think it is just so special how the Sheep think that Saudi Arabia LOVES! America enough to give us such Great pricing.. and that it has NOTHING to do wth the Military Arms we sell to them at a discount! LOL!!

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 13:59 | 2355443 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

We do not know how much oil is coming out of the ground globally.  The monitoring agencies of EIA, IEA and JODI do not agree among themselves, even though most just take government figures (unaudited).

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:04 | 2355464 tmosley
tmosley's picture

lol Death Worshippers looking a bit like idiot faux Christians thinking the world was going to end on a certain day.  Those idiots have been backpedaling ever since, throwing up new date after new date based on new "calculations" and "deep study".  Somehow I have a feeling the PO community will be doing the same over the coming years.

For what I am sure won't be the last time, this crisis is a MONETARY one, NOT a supply limited one.  If it was supply limited, oil would have risen further and faster than gold.  But it hasn't.  It is sitting on the 50 year average.  Even though there is an ass ton more gold above ground now than there was 50 years ago.


Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:31 | 2355570 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

Yawn. Isn't it about time you start peddling your unproven abiotic oil theories, which you didn't subsribe to, until you did? Or start posting links to scientific research which, according to you, will DEFINITELY turn things around, despite being unproven on a big scale?

Oh, and;

Hubbert, in his 1956 paper,[3] presented two scenarios for US conventional oil production (crude oil + condensate):

  • most likely estimate: a logistic curve with a logistic growth rate equal to 6%, an ultimate resource equal to 150 Giga-barrels (Gb) and a peak in 1965.
  • upper-bound estimate: a logistic curve with a logistic growth rate equal to 6% and ultimate resource equal to 200 Giga-barrels and a peak in 1970.


That Hubbert, he sure was a crank.

Oh, and from the IEA:

Global production of conventional crude oil plateaued in 2005 at 74 mb/d. 

OMG ALL CRANKS!!!11eleventyone1

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:48 | 2355822 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Your post is just filled with fallacies and anti-rational bias.

A. I never "peddled" "unproven" abiotic oil theories.  I showed conclusive evidence that deep dwelling microbes exist, and that their very existance proves that oil can be produced in isolation from surface biology.  I then questioned the RATE at which that occured.  The only reason I interjected into that particular argument was because on one side you had idiot death worshippers saying something that has been proven to exist, doesn't, and on the other, you had miriclists claiming that oil is infinite because of abiotic production.  YOU WERE BOTH WRONG.

B.  You reject all scientific and technological advance, and any possibility thereof.  This is not rational, given thousands of years of precedence of such.

C.  Peak oil is simply moot.  There are dozens of technologies that could easily "save" us if government would get out of the way.  

D.  When the market is flooded with oil, such that there aren't enough refineries, sane producers aren't going to bust their balls to put more oil out there.  Turning off the faucet when your house is flooding is common sense, not peak water.

E.  A plateau is not a peak.  I have had this talk with numerous zealots such as yourself.  Rising demand in the developing world is being met with falling demand from the declining West.  Simple as that.

F (for ultimate fail).  This crisis isn't about peak oil.  That has been proven about a hundred times over, and is most easily shown by the fact that oil priced in gold has gone no-where in the last 50 years.

So why don't you just junk all of my highly accurate posts and go cry in a corner.  Death will come for you soon enough.  But it will not have been foreordained like you wish it was.  It will be because of government incompetence and the active suppression of technological advance.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:16 | 2355919 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

"You reject all scientific and technological advance"

yes, man has conquered every challenge, well mostly himself

"Peak oil is simply moot"

are you running for office? or, as you admit, getting ready to invade a country?

"a plateau is not a peak"

and tar sands and other substitutes are not oil

"oil priced in gold has gone nowhere"

one utterly controlled market measuring another does little for physics

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:48 | 2356024 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Sorry, did you have something to say, or were you just posting empty words?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:06 | 2356086 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

A) Bullshit. You didn't peddle abiotic oil, then you discovered it, found a theory you could subscribe to, and then you started peddling it. You didn't question the rate until others made you aware of this point. You are guilty of this zealotry you accuse others of.

B) No, I don't. But unlike you, I have spent a large amount of my professional life in R&D and can absolutely guarantee that something working in the lab does not mean it will scale to the real world.

C) Indeed, but that is totally irrelevant to a discussion on oil.

D) If the profits were there, refineries wouldn't be shut down.

E) The growth in developing nations outstrips the lowered demand in the West. As for conventional supply, it very much has peaked. The gap is being made up from ultradeep and other sources of low EROEI. Plenty of IEA slides address this point.

F) Who was addressing the current world crisis? Hey, perhaps I should start dragging completely irrelevant points into the discussion as well, and then claim FAIL back at you?

As for the rest of your little pathetic rant, perhaps you should concentrate on just making up more shit as you go along, as you clearly seem to have found your niche.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:25 | 2356187 tmosley
tmosley's picture

A.  So, what?  I am a bastard for accepting new ideas when new evidence comes to light?  How is pulling a 180 based on new evidence zealotry?  That is exactly the kind of argument that an idiot zealot would come up with--100% counterfactual, 100% counterlogical.

B.  Yes, you do.  You conflate a large number of things not making it with EVERYTHING not making it.  That is the difference between a mud hut in Africa and footprints on the Moon.  Also, you aren't the only one who works in R&D.  Maybe you are just bitter from repeated failure, and I am optimistic from success (I wear my success in my smile, which is totally free from plaque thanks to the coating I developed).

C.  If you actually think that, then why harp on peak oil, rathe than harping on government intervention in the energy markets!?  And yes, government intervention is TOTALLY relevant when discussing oil.

D.  The profits aren't there because of inflation.  That is the true cause of the rise in energy prices we have seen over the last decade.

E.  Excuses excuses.  Yet the price doesn't rise in real terms.  If the real price doesn't rise, then supply and demand are in balance.

F.  Death worshipping peak oilers always want their thesis to be the central cause of everything that is happening in the world.  I made a mistake and assumed that you were a high up cult member, like Trav or Crashisoptimistic or Flakmeister.  I was arguing against them rather than you with that.  I'm sorry.

If that's really not the way you think, then good on you.  But I suspect that it is.  I have yet to meet a subscriber to Peak Oil that didn't think like that.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:49 | 2356265 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

Absolutely no intellectual or factual content.  Tom, don't try and make points anymore, it is just making you look stupid.  Here let me translate for everyone.  Here is what Tom just said;


B.  I have never worked in Oil and Gas and really don't understand physics or thermodynaimcs so I am going to use a big word like... "conflate"

C. It's the governments fault (the same people I voted for)

D.  Inflation is why oil production and profit has flatlined, becasue I say so, no facts nescessary (my personal favorite, nevermind the whole cost of energy invested and energy infested in relation to the amount of energy you acutally fucking recover)

E.  My silver buys more oil then ever (actually a true staement) so there is no problem (Tom still thinks you can not have inflation without increased demand and an increase in the velocity of money - FAIL)

F. you are all death worshipers (especially anyone with actually experience working in these areas).

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:09 | 2355488 yogibear
yogibear's picture

LOL, the Saudi wells have already peaked. More demand daily from China will keep soaking up any slack. Bernanke and the Fed's money printing should drive oil and food prices even higher. 

The more Bernanke and the Fed prints higher prices and inflation goes. Oil's average price will just keep climbing with Bernanke printing.


Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:12 | 2355500 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Unless you mean they peaked like a week ago, you are just plain wrong.  They pumped more than they have ever pumped in history, according to the article.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:50 | 2355634 Hohum
Hohum's picture

T Mosley,

It makes sense they pumped more than ever before--the Brent price of oil is near $120/barrel.  I wish we could know the net energy on their extraction.

I think they'll produce more as long as oil continues to rise.  If not, they won't.  And your wet dreams of higher and higher oil production will come to orgasm.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:55 | 2355846 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Think about it from their perspective.  Saudis don't care about dollars.  They care about gold, and they care about holding on to power.

As of now, they are getting the same amount of gold they have gotten for the last 50 years, so no problems there (until gold goes up more).  They are making a half-hearted effort to keep the price down, or at least make the US think they are trying, so they get to stay in power, protected by the US military.

That is all that is going on here.

Everyone seems to want to think that there is no monetary component to this crisis, that everything is peak oil, and that there is no way out.  

Doom vs boom is a war, and ideas are soldiers.  If you think that we are doomed, then you must support any and all ideas that would result in doom, or else you are a traitor.  The truth has no place in such childishness.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:23 | 2355948 Vagabond
Vagabond's picture

If peak oil is the problem here, that would indicate that the Fed can successfully balance the growth of debt and the growth of GDP as long as there is enough cheap energy.  If both parts of that statement are true, then there is an obvious way out: a new, better form of cheap energy.  If someone were to discover a new form of cheap energy but currently have a big hand in the oil game, that person might let that hand play itself out before unveiling the new form of energy.  Also, if you have a big hand in the game, you might have something to gain by bringing the world to fullblown crisis before unveiling the new form of energy.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:48 | 2356027 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Good point.  Look at what China is doing now.  Building prototype LFTR nukes to burn thorium.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:37 | 2356238 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

"They pumped more than they have ever pumped in history"


The chart I see for Texas shows that they are almost back to pumping what they where over twenty years ago.  Gee, before you know it they might even get back to pumping what they did in 1975.  As Charles Sheen would say "winning".

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:22 | 2355544 q99x2
q99x2's picture

'Iran production has declined from 3.46MM BPD to 3.35MM BPD.'

Shucks and they're not even exchanging it it in dollars anymore.

That was easy. What next?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:24 | 2355547 lemonobrien
lemonobrien's picture

drain dem bitches dry; and when its finished, we send in the military to pillage the fucking whore.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:30 | 2355567 tmosley
tmosley's picture

You don't invade countries that don't have oil.  It just isn't done!

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:42 | 2355784 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

yes, more evidence that peak doesn't exist, right?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 16:52 | 2356041 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Your post is evidence that you are unable to comprehend the things that you read.

Peak hasn't HAPPENED, and when it does, it will be about as relevent as the peak of whale oil production in the 1800's.  It will be made MOOT by the numerous advances in technology that are being made RIGHT NOW, which death worshippers prefer to ignore, because those kinds of facts make extinction unlikely, and doom vs boom is a war, and ideas are soldiers, so any idea that implies doom must be supported at all costs.  The sacrifice for that good is the truth.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:47 | 2355621 yabyum
yabyum's picture

Lemon, Why? There is no cogent reason to be there unless we can steal the product.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:17 | 2355707 lemonobrien
lemonobrien's picture

they have our gold from Fort Knox; and after oil, gold will move armies.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:28 | 2356195 tmosley
tmosley's picture

It will, but only if the destination is within walking distance.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 14:25 | 2355551 mickeyman
mickeyman's picture

No problem, they have lots. It will only cost about $4 trillion and take ten years for them to increase their production to replace lost Iranian production.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 23:49 | 2355617 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

Is it true that there's an oil pipeline across the Persian Gulf carrying Iranian crude oil to Saudi Arabia?


Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:46 | 2355659 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

It's worth noting that restrictions on growth due to oil need not preclude growth in oil production.

Read that carefully.  

You can grow oil production and be limited.  The core concept is there is no difference between excess consumption and inadequate supply.  If consumption wants to grow and can't because of inadequate supply, it does not matter if that supply is growing.  The issue would be that it's not growing fast enough.

Beyond that, it's also worth noting that the Saudis probably can ramp to 12 mbpd via decision.  They have some oil stored above ground.  They could force it into the pipelines and achieve big numbers for a day or two, or even a week.  There is also the geology of coning.  You can force water into the ground at too high a pressure and raise extraction rate, but you will seal off some available reserves forever if you do that.

And last point . . . all oil is not created equal.  Manifa oil is less attractive than Ghawar oil.  They can produce it and feed it to their insanely expensive refineries and accomodate the coming summer cooling season with it.  Meaning, the production won't be exported.  Each summer Saudi Arabia consumption rises about 700K bpd from Jaunary.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:16 | 2355705 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

It's their way of contributing to Obama's campaign. I wouldn't be surprised if this was arranged behind closed doors.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 15:52 | 2355836 imbrbing
imbrbing's picture

We don't have a peak oil problem, and we are going to squeeze the oil out of rocks now to prove it /sarc

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:20 | 2356152 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

"The oil shale resources of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming exceed 1 trillion barrels, in-place. Rich, high quality zones yielding greater than 30 gallon per ton are found throughout the region. Past failures to commercialize this vast resource can be attributed to price uncertainty and immature technology, not an inherent deficiency in the resource."


These (insert vulgar name of your choice) are seriously thinking that they can indeed squeeze oil out of rocks and for a profit no less!!!!,,,,  just like unicorns shit out skittles....;)


I love that buzz word..."immature technology"...  yeahhh "THE FUTURE'S SO BRIGHT I GOTTA WEAR SHADES..."

I remember a young engineer playing this song for me over a few beers....... 

Immature technology,,,, warp speed on Star Trek is an example of immature technology...  "Engage, Number 1.."

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:32 | 2356206 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Thorium seems to be the most likely technology to moot peak fossil fuels in general, including oil, given China's interest.

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:50 | 2356229 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

Right, now precisely how much energy are those reactors providing for us again?

Even better, where is the capital going to come from to develop this now that we are broke?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 18:10 | 2356342 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

That was intriguing, however he forgot to say that with the current tech, thorium requires irradiation and reprocessing before it can be used for electrical generation, this is "expensive" and still requires a "traditional" nuclear plants to "boot strap" your way up....  In my view his creditability was damaged by not explaining the "still to be resolved" issues to make thorium reactors viable.

"..likely technology to moot peak fossil fuels..."  I wouldn't be "crowing"... yet... but I am a cynical and old, and have had my hat handed to me more than once....  that is why I love the fight

Got any real "technical links" (not the "pretty fluffy stuff " that is served to the sheeple....)?

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:26 | 2356185 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

"The development of the Manifa oil field in Saudi Arabia has been accelerated recently. This is the last neo-virgin field that Saudi Aramco has in its coffers with which it can increase production capacity (by 900,000 bpd in this case) - or just remain even in the fight vs. depletion of its existing fields."

Wed, 04/18/2012 - 17:50 | 2356275 Iwanttoknow
Iwanttoknow's picture

Great post.

Thu, 04/19/2012 - 04:46 | 2357493 EmileLargo
EmileLargo's picture

There are two explanations: (1) Saudi has peaked and cannot produce more no matter how much they invest; or (2) They can produce more but they don't want to. Why would you produce more of a commodity that is your only source of income and drive down its price? The Saudis have painful memories of the 1980s.

So take your pick.  

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!