US citizens and Oil policy changes
 

I started this thought in another thread, but felt it important enough to start it's own thread.

As the United States has little oil producing capability of it's own, we are dependent on South America for a great deal of natural Gas and the Middle East for our primary source of liquid crude.
Most oil companies in the middle east act as middle men and provide favored tading status to US oil companies in exchange for technology and know how. Many Middle East countries require that all oil extraction companies be owned by a citizen, but allow the citizens to work for campanies of international reputation.

Given that ownership is rarely in the hands of a multi-national then, and on the rare occasion that it is , is such only on paper, what futures does this set-up hold?

For one, those oil feilds owned my American/Multinational companies could be seized by the local goverments at any moment. These same governments could expel American/Multinational business men seeking trade. Both these actions would raise the cost of crude signifigantly.
More simply, OPEC could simply decide to punish us with a majority descion to limit US oil sales and put US orders at a lower priority. Some of these fall perfectly within their right and are not Illlegal acts. This is their national resource, not ours, and we have no right to object to whom they choose to trade with, and in what priority. Further, short of war we have little recourse to objecting to the servering of binding production contracts with US companies.

In short, OPEC could choose to stop trading with us if they so felt the need, or to punish us. I have little doubt that countries like China and India would step in to fill demand in our abscence.

If OPEC trade with the United States was servered by it's member nations, would this be grounds for war?
Do you feel that this would be unfair?
Are you of the opinion that if we lost OPEC as a trading partner, this would justify exploring and extracting what little crude remains on US soil and ocean bed, regardless of place?

Lets try something new and not mention either Presidential Candidate in this discussion. You can make a good argument or discussion without mentioning them, I promise.

if OPEC tried that the US would stop exporting to those countries and importing other things from them. So would much of the rest of the world i'd imagine and OPEC would crash and burn fast.

Not only that but Saudi Arabia will always have oil for us as long as we keep helping them opress their people.

OPEC is not going to "punish" the US. It would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face, to use a colourful (Biblical?) analogy.

Mr Mephisto

No president can justify sending U.S. troops into harm's way when it is not
absolutely necessary. The facts reveal that our indifferent attitude about
our excessive per capita fuel consumption must cease before use of our
troops would be justified. The U.S. population is about 6 percent of
world population. U.S. consumers are driving the largest and heaviest
vehicles that they ever have driven at a time of record high fuel prices.
Having made the indefensible decision to drive these huge SUV's when common sense should dictate choosing a smaller, more fuel efficient vehicle,

in a time when U.S. domestic oil output has declined 30 percent since the
mid 1980's and with the examples of more responsible energy policies of other
industrialized countries available for the U.S. to examine if we cared to look,
and with an oil imports driven, ever rising unsustainable U.S. trade deficit,
how could we trust ourselves or our leaders to correctly determine that we
are justifies to use troops to secure the oil resources of other countries for
our continued glutinous useage, which we cannot even afford at present
prices, with only the monetary cost of the Iraq expedition, and no other
direct expenditures for military action in securing foreign oil supplies.

The U.S. consumes 20 million barrels of oil each day, of the
82 million barrel daily world production. The U.S. produces 7.8 million barrels
per day, and imports 12.2 million barrels per day.
<a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/usa.html">http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/usa.html</a>
<a href="http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/business/9752045.htm">http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/business/9752045.htm</a><p>
There is only a one percent cushion of world oil production vs. consumption.
At the current market price of $50 per barrel, U.S. oil imports cost $610 million
per day. These $220 billion annual foreign oil payments represent one third
of the U.S. $600 billion 2004 trade deficit.
World GDP total in 2003 was $51.5 trillion. U.S. GDP was $11 trillion. Look
around you.....with oil at a record high price, many Americans are driving
the largest, heaviest, and fuel consumptive vehicles that they have ever
owned. Motor fuels account for 45 percent, or 9 million barrels of the
20 million barrel daily U.S. oil consumption.
So...the U.S. share of world GDP is 21.3 percent, and U.S. oil consumption is
24.4 percent. Can't the most inventive and technologically advanced nation in
the world achieve better energy efficiency vs. GDP than 8 to 7 ?
Canadian GDP is $1 trillion, 2 percent of world GDP, Canada consumes
1.7 million barrels of oil per day, or about 2 percent of world oil production.
Germany GDP is $2.3 trillion, 4-1/2 percent of world GDP. Germany consumes
2.82 million barrels of oil per day, 3.43 percent of world oil production.
Japan GDP is $3.58 trillion, 7 percent of world GDP, Japan consumes 5.3
million barrels of oil per day, 6.4 percent of world oil production.
<a href="http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/xx.html">http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/xx.html</a>
<p>
If the U.S. enjoyed the energy efficiency of Germany, we could consume
13.48 million barrels of oil per day to produce $11 trillion annual GDP. We
would import 6.5 million barrels of oil per day less than we do now.
We would lower our trade deficit by $118 billion per year, and, by increasing
the available daily world oil supply be 6.5 million barrels, or from a 1 percent
cushion between supply and demand, to an 9 percent cushion. The price
of oil would plummet, U.S. annual trade deficit could drop even further, and
U.S. foreign policy would not be held hostage to the issue of middle east
oil field security.

With the $150 billion we have spent in invading and occupying Iraq, the U.S.
could have made signifigant progress in energy conservation investment and
in research to develop and promote alternative fuels and energy sources.
We are living through a failure of leadership, and a failure as a country as
to our efforts to make informed decisions about who we vote for, what we
drive, the size of our homes, and about choices of responsible and sustainable\ lifestyles compared to other people who live in industrialized
nations.

It doesn't look to me that Saudi Arabia would be signifigantly set back as
far as imports and exports if they stopped doing business with the U.S.,
in comparison to what the iimpact would be to the U.S. It would also be
a convenient time for the Saudis to switch to the much more financially
sound Euro as the principle currency that it accepts for purchase of it's oil.