Slashdot Mirror
There Would Be No Iranian Nuclear Talks If Not For Fracking
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Matthew Philips writes at Bloomberg that US Secretary of State John Kerry landed in Geneva on Friday to begin negotiations with Iran over its nuclear weapons program and there is sudden optimism that a deal is in the offing. But the simple fact is that Iran would not be coming to the negotiating table without the US oil boom. Over the last two years, the US has increased its crude production by about 2 million barrels a day. According to a recent report from the Congressional Research Service (pdf), Iran's oil exports have been cut in half since 2011 (PDF), from 2.5 million barrels per day to a bit more than 1 million today. As a result, Iran has had to halt an equal amount of production. 'I think it's pretty clear that without the U.S. shale revolution, it never would have been possible to put this kind of embargo on Iran,' says Julius Walker. 'Without US production gains, I think we'd be looking at $150 a barrel.' Instead, international prices have hovered around $110, and are less than $100 in the US. According to data from Bloomberg, the combined carrying capacity of oil tankers leaving Iranian ports last month dropped 22 percent from September. 'They're having a very hard time finding buyers,' says Walker. If a deal gets done, the trick will be to ease Iranian oil back onto the broader market without disrupting prices. If not managed properly, flooding the market with Iranian crude could carry its own negative consequences by suddenly making fracked oil in the US unprofitable."
It's a global market - oil gets shipped all around the world via tanker. If the US buys less oil, that means the sellers have more oil to sell, which they in turn sell to someone else (Probably China, they have huge demand), who in turn then doesn't buy from Iran. It's all interconnected.
Global Supply and Demand doesn't care who buys from where. I'm not saying that it is true that we owe a debt of gratitude to frackers for bringing about world peace. I'm simply pointing out that your implication that there is no correlation because we don't specifically purchase our oil from Iran is a similarly flawed claim.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
"If not managed properly, flooding the market with Iranian crude could carry its own negative consequences by suddenly making fracked oil in the US unprofitable."
You know all those people comaining about the money the government 'wastes' on subsidising green energy?
The government spends a lot more on oil, just less directly. Whole wars have been fought to keep that fuel affordable, and now they are even important enough to engage in market price manipulation to protect their profits.
The 'fucking summary' is wrong, though. Iranian oil makes up a very tiny fraction of US imports.
It is not about how much US imports from Iran. It's the ability to shut down Iranian oil imports without having an effect on global oil prices, because US is now able to make up the difference. Just trying to be clear on what TFA 'claims', since, not being an oil industry expert, I have no clue whether it is true or not.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Quote: 'Without US production gains, I think we'd be looking at $150 a barrel.'
This is the bubble where ideology and proof are one and the same.
Well, the USA is falling apart. Therefore the need for nukes isn't quite as extreme as it once was. Also, Germany and Denmark are pointing towards how an advanced society can operate without nukes or carbon, and in a place as sunny as Iran, this becomes a kind of no-brainer.
Iran's biggest worry is their biggest asset: The South Pars gas field. The Europeans want it BAD as an alternative to Russian natgas, and the Americans would love to take it away from Iran, just cuz the Americans are a bunch of greedy dicks who'd love to stick it to the Russians, and screw the Iranians in the process. As long as South Pars stays underground, the Russians have their captured market (Europe) and Iran has money in the bank. As long as Iran was banging the nuke drum, the Americans were able to keep their psychotic fear machine rolling. Now that the USA Empire is entering late afternoon, they can afford to play nice with them and their pointy little all american bullet headed saxon mother's sons. Franking is crushing the natgas market, but everyone knows franking is a temporary solution, so Iran will hold that Ace of South Pars and cash big time when they will need the money to transition to solar. At that point the USA will be in some kind of tizzy tea party dipshit media freak show - probably with Britney Spears running as a Republican and (fill in name of faceless bureaucrat) on the Democratic ticket and some frothing tool of the Koch guard as a third party spoiler.
Ya gotta look at this stuff with a longer term view...
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
While the drop in Iranian exports is certainly a sum of many things, the article completely fails to mention the EU sanctions. Notice the very sharp drop in the export volume graph mid-2012? That's the sanctions coming fully to force in July 2012: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_sanctions_against_Iran#Sanctions
The 'fucking summary' is wrong, though. Iranian oil makes up a very tiny fraction of US imports.
You should look up the word fungible. It makes little difference whether Iran sells direct to the USA or not. If Iran sells instead to Europe and China, and they participate in the sanctions, then they will have to buy elsewhere. Likewise, fracking in America means Americans import less, leaving more oil for others. There is only one world market for oil.
You're wrong. I believe everything that I read, particularly if it is backed by big oil money. This is good enough for me, and I'm glad to give up clean drinking water, have flames shoot out of my faucets, and let the fracking industry pump any industrial toxins that they want into the ground, as long as they tell me that it is keeping the Iranians in check.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Wat?
I can't believe I just read that. If you don't remember these things, all it means is you need to revise your 20th century history again.
Let's review. Israel, in its extremely short life so far, has managed to obtain a global reputation for being insanely aggressive and warlike. The very creation of it led immediately to war with its new neighbours. Israel not only has nukes, but also created the Mossad, which openly assassinates people it doesn't like. Its leaders routinely threaten to attack or invade Iran if Israel's "friends" even think about being the slightest bit reasonable or diplomatic. Fear of what the completely crazy Israeli leadership might do if diplomacy fails is one of the reasons the rest of the world has implemented sanctions - it's seen as marginally preferable to Israel starting all out war in the middle east, which we know they wouldn't hesitate to do.
Pakistan and India have been at each others throats since the moment India became independent from the British Empire. The Partition was the rest of one of the most bloody civil wars in recent history. Since then both India and Pakistan have managed to obtain nukes, and their constant fighting over Kashmir is rated one of the most likely triggers for nuclear war. Each side routinely accuses the other of sponsoring terrorist attacks.
Of all the countries in the world you could have picked to try and make Iran look bad, you could not have chosen worse. Iran, despite the incredible amounts of shit they have had dumped on them in recent times, is not at all likely to invade a neighbour or randomly start a war in the middle east. I know this runs counter to US and Israeli propaganda, but there's no evidence at all that this is even slightly likely to happen - the Iranian leader has even said that war is un-Islamic, and he's really big on not doing things that are un-Islamic. Contrast this to the Israeli leaders who talk about war all the time.
BTW the story is crap. It's been obvious for ages that the sanctions have been put in place because America is Israeli's bitch and Europe is America's bitch. They aren't going to be removed, ever, because the people who control the sanctions regime are motivated by power, and only power. See how the moment it looked like there might be progress in Geneva the American's were running to Israel to re-assure them that the sanctions weren't going to be lifted no matter what happens (and that's despite them being struck down as illegal in European courts).
The main reason Iran is negotiating on weapons is that the Iranian people elected president Rouhani. They were sick of Ahmadinejad clownish posturing and hostility to just about every other nation. Sanctions are having wearing effect on Iranian families and they didn't see an improvement in future as long as a leader like Ahmadinejad ( although he was not standing again ) was in power. The Iranian people elected a moderate with a mandate to improve Iran's foreign relations and that is what is happening. We will see a lot more of this in the months to come and more of Israel's attempts to derail any agreements.