Slashdot Mirror
Exxon and Russian Operation Discovers Oil Field Larger Than the Gulf of Mexico
An anonymous reader writes The state-run OAO Rosneft has discovered a vast pool of crude in the Kara Sea region of the Arctic Ocean, arguably bigger than the Gulf of Mexico. From the article: "The discovery sharpens the dispute between Russia and the U.S. over President Vladimir Putin’s actions in Ukraine. The well was drilled before the Oct. 10 deadline Exxon was granted by the U.S. government under sanctions barring American companies from working in Russia’s Arctic offshore. Rosneft and Exxon won’t be able to do more drilling, putting the exploration and development of the area on hold despite the find announced today."
Oil's well that ends well
Hopefully America will seize the territory from the Russians, enemies of the world.
an ill wind that blows no good
Russians dont have more oil...no problem with that.The nice thing about that oil is that it will still be there 5 years from now.
"This is our united victory - it was achieved thanks to our friends and partners from Exxon Mobil, Nord Atlantic Drilling, Schlumberger, Halliburton..."
Time until Republicans start saying "Lift sanctions" 5...4..3..2...1
Last night I watched There Will Be Blood. I drink your milkshake!
You need lubricant to have enjoyable anal sex. See where I'm going here?
Russian Monopoly on Gay Anal Sex. Stay Tuned for News at 11!
It's almost as if Russia was anticipating this all along, and decided that the Crimea is up for grabs. With a leverage this big I'm surprised they didn't chose something juicier. Just saying...
I remember one teacher who liked investigating conspiracy theories about how the world will run out of peak oil one day and everyone will freak out. 10+ years later and we're still finding the stuff, will prices go back down now? Will there be a war over it? I won't be able to afford a Tesla for a while so this buys my some time :)
"Rosneft and Exxon won’t be able to do more drilling, putting the exploration and development of the area on hold"
Who exactly is supposed to be worried this is a bad thing? For the next 10 or 20 years the oil will be more valuable to Russia in the ground as long as they have evidence that it's there.
It looks like the date for "peak oil" just pushed out awhile, again.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
"The well found about 1 billion barrels of oil..."
The world uses 86 million barrels per day, so this buys us about 11 extra days. Whoopee Do...
Is Ms Thrace causing trouble again?
Even the shale gas estimates and the Canadian tar sands estimate etc are being revised downwards. They drill a few test wells, and interpolate and "guestimate" what lies in between. Let us see how this estimate holds up once the investment needed to further develop them are all reeled in and the time pay dividends come up.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
the state govt will do it , and exxon will go home and not get jack its why the rockefellers are out of oil....oil is no longer under jewish american hands
*nm*
Good, maybe exoff will pay some of the American fisherman now they owe from Prince William Sound and that goddamned tanker exoff Valdez.
Sorry, Putin and Koch. Time to get the fuck out of our sunlight.
Russia won't be able to make any use of that discovery without western technology. That's why they needed Exxon's help. So, this is a leverage on the Russians who depend on the oil money.
arguably bigger than the Gulf of Mexico
Arguably? You've carried out your own exploration and you disagree about its extent?
That's just more oil that should be left in the ground, at least until we can get CO2 below ~350 parts per million
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Fossil fuels are a dense store of energy. The equipment for harnessing that energy is quite cheap, unlike nuclear. That energy can used any time, on a moment's notice, unlike wind and solar, which come at only certain times. That is why fossil fuels will be used for a long time.
How long until the US suspects Russia of terrorism? Then war, and, conveniently, oil. (if we win)
Exxon care so little about this planet and so much about their own profit that they don't give a damn if they kill off the planet, as long as they get theirs. Bastards.
Propylene Glycol is an organic chemical product that can also be derived from Palm Oil
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I can see that already. Find a small rock in that see and build a shelter on it — nothing fancy, as long as a SEAL can survive on it for a day or two. Place a retired SEAL on it. Organize a referendum on the rock on whether or not the "residents" wish for their territory to become part of the United States. Claim the land &mdash and the surrounding waters — as American.
PROFIT!
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Last time it was your boy-wonder, who lifted the sanctions against Russia... Abandoning American ally Georgia for the sake of Putin's help against Iran. Ha-ha — much good did it do then...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Now we can rest assured that our extinction will happen by the continuous burning of fossil fuels, not by the lack of it!
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
Last time it was your boy-wonder, who lifted the sanctions against Russia [nytimes.com]...
Yeah.... but sanctions really only send a message in the moment you apply them... After that they're just blocking economic growth in both countries.
So slowing removing them when nobody is looking is smart move... Then you can reapply them, if it should ever come to that.
As long as Putin is around, it's probably not the last time.
Also it doesn't make sense to carry a grudge forever... Sometimes it's better to just move along.
But right now, Cuba, Iran and North Korea doesn't really care much about what the US says.... because sort of armed conflict (in violation of the UN charter) the US can't really impose further sanctions. Cuba is pretty much the US holding an old grudge, lifting those sanctions ought to be a no-brainer... As for Iran and North Korea who both does have nuclear programs, there are pros/cons to maintaining and lifting sanctions. Maintaining them on North Korea, keeps the country crushed. Whereas Iran has oil that we'll buy either way, so maybe lifting sanctions on Iran would be worthwhile. Just maybe.
another 100 years of oil to go !!
Just what we need, enough oil to cause a extinction event when we burn it.
Yeah. You know it's almost as if the Russians didn't get a copy of the memo that says we are only permitted to use about 1/3 of the current known reserves.
You know, the memo that notes that if we don't leave the other 2/3 in the ground, we are COMPLETELY SCREWING OURSELVES and our little dogs too, on the climate front.
You know, sooner or later, our current "leaders" are going to be held liable for this criminally insane path they are steering us down with a greed-twisted grin on their faces. I can only hope it is sooner.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Funny how Libya under Ghadaffi got a get out of jail free card but Iran didn't. It seemed a bit backwards, especially since even Reagan did deals with Iran.
Swimmers? Dolphins?
Oh, crude OIL. Apparently, writing the word "oil" was too much effort for the summary writer... cretin.
OK, that's it. Wind the Regime Change dial up to 11. We can't have Godless Commies (TM) stealing our God-given Oil.
Will we have enough oxygen to burn it enough electricity to power all those A/C units in a couple of years time...
It's easy to make a term mean anything when personal definitions apply and you've listed a few who do that - but I addressed all that in the post you replied to.
We barely knew ya.
"...Also it doesn't make sense to carry a grudge forever... "
Although the masters of the universe in Washington, with their short attention spans, will perhaps whimsically decide to raise their sanctions when they decide that Russia has been "punished" enough, Russia will not reciprocate. That's because its sanctions were not imposed out of a sense of grudge or malice, or to "punish" anyone, but in the long-term interests of Russia. The USA and EU have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted, and no matter what they do or say in future that will not change. A liar and a cheat remains a liar and a cheat regardless of how many promises and fair words he utters.
Consequently Russia will obtain most of its food imports from South America, Africa and Asia; manufacture far more of its own machinery and electronics; sell its oil and gas within Asia; and deal, as far as possible, in roubles, yuan, and other currencies other than the dollar and sterling. Not because its leaders are in a towering snit, but because they are calm and rational.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Actually any "get out of jail free card" had a very short lifespan. Look at Libya now - and look at Qadafi.
In fact Libya suffered severely when the USA decided to court Iran when it was building up a coalition against Iraq. It seems very likely that the Lockerbie bombing was an act of revenge for the shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655 by the USS Vincennes just a few months before. US intelligence agencies immediately blamed Iran for Lockerbie - until the administration decided that it wanted to cozy up to Iran, when Libya was abruptly switched into the "guilty" seat.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Rosneft makes ExxonMobil look like a mom and pop heating oil delivery service.
It was not "free". In order to "get out of jail", Qaddafi had to acknowledge Libya being behind the Lockerbie bombing, and pay restitution to the victims' kin. That was, what was demanded of him and he complied (shortly after seeing Saddam Hussein being pulled from a hiding hole).
There was no other "beef" with him — unlike Iran, Libya did not seek nuclear weapons, nor was it providing anything better than "moral" support to any other terrorists.
That Obama — eager to show, that the sophisticated progressives can fight wars better, than the oil-thirsty KKKonservatives — chose to attack Mr. Ghadaffi anyway, was shameful treachery, which is bound to make any future "conversions" of foreign tyrants that much harder...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
There, there. "It is complicated"... GP was accusing RethugliKKKans of wanting to end sanctions against Russia in exchange for oil. You seem to be supporting such a maneuver.
Any sanctions imposed in retaliation for a certain deed — such as Russia's invasion into Afghanistan, Georgia or Ukraine — must last until the deed is reversed.
Lifting the punishment prematurely — as Obama did in 2010 — simply sends the aggressor the following signal: outlast the current American Administration and you can keep, whatever you gained. Had Obama kept (and ratcheted up) the pressure on Russia instead of lifting the sanctions, imposing new ones over Russian attack on Ukraine might even have been necessary — for no such attack would've taken place...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The Kara sea is where the Soviets dumped their melted down naval Nuclear Reactors. 5 of which still had spent fuel rods. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kara_Sea
Just what we need some radioactive oil?
Great! This should certainly cause gasoline prices to plummet!
A question for you and everyone who thinks that CO2 controls the climate. How long with rising CO2 and flat or falling temperatures before you admit your theory is wrong? 20 years? 30? Never?
All 5 of the major datasets (RSS, UAH, HadCRUT4, GISS, NCDC) show no warming for between 14 and almost 18 years. In that time CO2 has risen 8-10%.
Here are 2 predictions. First I predict that CO2 will continue to increase because China and other countries don't care about CO2. They don't even care about real pollutants much less CO2. Second I predict it will get colder over the next 20-30 years. Why?
Dr Libby in the 1970s said that "looking forward it will stay cold until the mid 80s (it did), then it will warm by about 1/4 degree F until the end of the century (it did), then it gets cold". When asked how cold she was predicting a 1-2 degree F drop with an outside chance of a 3-4 degree drop. Pray it is the former.
Dr Easterbrook in 2001 said the PDO was done it's positive warm cycle and that we were in for 25-30 years of cold weather. How cold? We have his good, bad and ugly predictions based on previous negative cold phases of the PDO. Pray it is the first one.
Dr Abdusamatov in 2006 said we are at the top of the temperature sine wave and it will be 200 years of cold weather. Pray he is wrong.
Why do I join with them and side with their predictions? While past performance is not a guarantee of future correctness it is a lot better record than the IPCC and their dozens of models of which none have been accurate. They are all based on CO2 controlling the climate and the other 3 are all cyclical natural cycles. I'll go with those who have a good track record at predicting future climate. Dr Libby is the most impressive as her prediction is 30+ years going and still accurate.
The U.S. will not let the Russians develop this field until Putin agrees that all oil sales will be conducted in U.S. dollars, allowing the U.S. to continue to print worthless money to spend on oil and purchase goods at a discount from countries needing U.S. dollars to buy oil. Who's your daddy.
All 5 of the major datasets (RSS, UAH, HadCRUT4, GISS, NCDC) show no warming for between 14 and almost 18 years.
UAH shows .112 deg/decade warming over 14 years. I didn't check any of your other claims. Yes, 2008 was a unusually cold year and for six years now, deniers have been abusing that one data point. You can make your own plots here. If you plot longer times you can see the variability that makes these claims that global warming has stopped obviously based on noise.
Any sanctions imposed in retaliation for a certain deed — such as Russia's invasion into Afghanistan, Georgia or Ukraine — must last until the deed is reversed.
That is certainly a valid argument... One that needs to be taken in to consideration, that said, if you don't let go (at some point), we end in a situation like we have with Iran where we can't impose further sanctions. Other matter to consider is that the best way to further democracy in Russia, is not to isolate Russia further. That'll just make it easier or Putin to control the media, etc.
I'm not saying we should lift sanctions against Russia anytime soon. In fact I favor threat of stronger sanctions. That said, why exactly does the US (as the only western country) still have trade sanctions against Cuba? Is that anything but old grudge. My point is let's not create more of those situations.
By the way, with respect to the Georgia conflict, if I remember correct the US was the only country to impose sanctions. EU talked about, but as I recall it never did anything, but talk... You can take that as a sign of EU weakness or a sign of lacking support for war-crazy Bush (as some Europeans probably do). With my country having followed Bush/US into Iraq on a lie, I don't trust want my politicians to trust the US or US intelligence.
Only if you don't count Semtex supply as support for terrorist groups including the IRA.