Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on October 9, 2014
Has the US turned off the Islamic State’s oil spigot?
Having control of oil helped make the Islamic State the richest terrorist group ever. That’s one reason that U.S. and allied airstrikes have hammered its oil operations since late September. But two weeks later, one big question remains: Is the U.S.-led campaign succeeding in strangling the Islamic State’s golden goose?
The terrorist group, also known as ISIS or ISIL, turned its control of oil fields in Syria and Iraq into a lucrative revenue stream. By some accounts, the group was earning as much as $2 million a day from the illicit sales of crude oil and refined products, which were smuggled across the border to Turkey in pipelines and trucks. The oil money, combined with other illegal businesses, made the Islamic State largely self-funded. But it also created a host of fresh vulnerabilities: oil infrastructure that U.S. and allied warplanes could target for destruction.
Two weeks after the beginning of the Pentagon’s campaign to degrade and destroy ISIS in Syria, the U.S. military’s Central Command says that it has hit some 16 mobile oil refineries, a key piece of ISIS’s ability to make money off the oil fields found in territory it has overrun.
But the Defense Department is not tracking the impact of those strikes on ISIS’s oil operations; that falls to the Treasury Department, which spearheads the fight against terror financing. A Treasury spokesperson said that it is too soon to make any formal estimate of how the military campaign has affected ISIS’s oil operations.
Still, rough estimates are available. The Pentagon said that each of those mobile refineries could churn out between 300 and 500 barrels a day of refined products such as diesel fuel. So airstrikes so far may have wiped out as much as 8,000 barrels a day of ISIS’s refining capacity — or almost half the 18,000 barrels a day of capacity that ISIS was believed to have at the peak of its expansion this summer.
Crippling that capacity could pay dividends for the United States and its Arab allies in two ways: by cutting into ISIS’s ability to make money, and by curtailing its own fuel supplies, which are needed to run military vehicles and meet civilian energy needs in the areas it controls.
“Taking half of that refined capacity out would be very problematic for the group,” said Valérie Marcel, an oil expert at Chatham House in London. “If there are fuel shortages everywhere they are in charge, they aren’t providing services, and if their military logistics are affected by a lack of refined products, it would be very serious for them,” she said.
The Islamic State’s ambitious military operations, including a large-scale assault on the Syrian town of Kobani and its ongoing use of Humvees, trucks, and tanks, make it more dependent on a steady supply of fuel, just like other armed forces throughout history. Gen. George S. Patton’s armored dash across France in World War II wasn’t stopped by the Wehrmacht, but rather by empty gas tanks.
“Energy supplies play a core role in ISIS’s military campaign; therefore, hitting their resources and oil convoys will undoubtedly cripple their movement and hinder their advances,” said Luay al-Khatteeb, visiting fellow at Brookings Doha Center and the director of the Iraq Energy Institute. He estimates that the total requirements for refined products in areas under ISIS control — including fuel used for power generation and for civilian transportation — come to between 170,000 and 200,000 barrels per day, far outstripping the group’s own resources.
At the same time as the airstrikes, ISIS’s oil operations have come under siege from another direction: Turkey. After months of seemingly turning a blind eye to the endemic smuggling across Turkey’s long and porous borders, Turkish officials started cracking down on illicit fuel sales in recent months. Local reports suggest that in some areas, illicit cross-border fuel sales may have fallen by as much as 80 percent due to tougher Turkish measures.
Still, it’s not totally clear to what degree the U.S.-led military campaign has really managed to disrupt ISIS’s oil business. One militant told the Wall Street Journal that oil production and refining continues apace, despite the military campaign. “The airstrikes have been lamer than expected,” he said.
ISIS could also theoretically rebuild some of the shattered refining capacity taken out of action by allied airstrikes. Marcel of Chatham House said that mobile refineries could be built in 10 days at a cost of about $230,000 each — provided the terror group could get its hands on the equipment.
Treasury officials concede that targeting small-scale smuggled oil is harder than tracking illicit terror financing. A former State Department official said that oil smuggling continues, despite the attacks on the mobile refineries; only by rolling back ISIS on the ground can the United States and its allies permanently kneecap its moneymaking operations.
“You’re going to have to physically take the territory back,” said Celina Realuyo, the director of counterterrorism finance programs at the State Department during the George W. Bush administration and now a professor at Georgetown University.
| Stars and Stripes |
15 Comments on "Has the US turned off the Islamic State’s oil spigot?"
Davy on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 7:17 am
The oil glut as corns call it here on PO and MSM may do more hurt to ISIL than the bombing. In an environment of outrage with ISIL, business dealings with them will be problematic and less profitable. That is a bad marketing environment to be in but oil will always sell nonetheless. It is a big wonder why ISIL is attacking the Kurds that have facilitated so much of their oil sales. This article mentions two key components to ISIL vulnerability. One is the mechanization we have seen of the ISIL attacks. Hitting them logistically will greatly degrade their conventional military abilities. The other is the local infrastructure, production, and distribution. If the population becomes stressed by shortages they will lose valuable local support. That is when counter insurgencies become effective. Time is on ISIL side long term with the demise of BAU but in the short term they must capitalize on their advantages they have now. They are in a race for time in the short term but their future is assured as a player in the longer term. The barbarians have always triumphed when empires fall. BAU is an empire in a death rattle. The only problem this time is the obscene overshoot of this desert region that is being hammered into the Stone Age by the day never to be rebuilt. ISIL will be lords of a desert wasteland someday.
steam_cannon on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 9:01 am
I love that the article used the words “from the illicit sales of crude oil”, LOL! I don’t, that just made me smile. 🙂
Dave Thompson on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 9:42 am
So the people of the region are trying to pump the oil that belongs to them? The Us and Co. Inc. don’t like it cause we don’t get to control the profits? This war is total bullshit lies for oil.
rockman on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 10:19 am
I don’t know if it’s accurate but I’m told the “hot oil” (what we call stolen production in the oil patch) is going for around $20-$30 per bbl. I’m not sure if they are sneaking it out by a pipeline (not likely) or by tanker truck. But at that price it would take 500 to 700 tankers per day hauling the oil to some export point. That would make for a rather target rich (and very explosive) environment for our drones and jets so that doesn’t sound right either.
I have read that they were running some of the oil thru small “tea pot refineries” making their own fuel. But I also saw reports we were hitting their refineries so I suspect those were these small operations. Another very easy target for our air power: hot refineries would be easy meat for heat seekers. So IMHO I think I would take the $2 million/day with a big grain of salt. Given that ISIS is now operating in an essentially free fire zone for the US et al producing/moving oil wouldn’t be a simple matter.
Nony on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 10:33 am
I really doubt it is “free fire”. (or that it should be.) Real free fire is a gruesome thing. My uncle flew kill boxes in VN with the A1D. And even those were very restricted in size. I would expect that there are at least the normal restrictions on collateral damage. There’s a process for how targets are selected that balances the risk of damage to civilians, baby milk factories, etc.
Nony on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 10:34 am
I am not a bomber pilot, but I have had basic training in joint air campaign planning (as a reservist).
Also, note the scale of bombs dropped (e.g. in GW1 or 2) far eclipses what is being done now.
GregT on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 10:35 am
What a complete load of crap. The lies keep getting thicker and thicker. This illegal invasion will not end until Al Qaeda/ FSA/ ISIS/ ISIL/ IS hides their ‘mobile refineries’ throughout Damascus, and the Assad government is mistakenly taken out as collateral damage. ( or some other equally absurd story )
In the meantime, hundreds of thousands of innocent people will continue to be forced to flee in exile, have their villages, towns, and cities reduced to rubble, and their friends, family members, and loved one brutally murdered.
It’s no wonder that they’re telling us this ‘War’ will last for 30 years. The more women and children brutally massacred, the stronger the cause will become.
Get ready folks, I smell more acts of ‘terrorism’ on home soil, and a further degradation of civil liberties. Got to keep the masses afraid of the boogeyman. As laid out so many times before, it is the quickest route to achieving the NWO.
Plantagenet on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 10:43 am
PBS showed footage of US airstrikes on the city of Khobani. The US bombs caused huge explosions and destroyed apartment buildings right in the center of the city. Of course there are horrific civilian casualties from such bombing—-why pretend otherwise?
hvacman on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 11:17 am
One basic point everyone seems to be missing when suggesting that destroying the refineries is impacting ISIS’ crude oil sales cash flow. Mobile refineries refine crude – they don’t produce it. Destroying them does nothing to stop IS’s ability to sell and export crude oil. They aren’t exporting/selling refined product. They put the crude in tanker trucks and sell it that way.
Destroying mobile refineries probably has more of a military logistic impact than financial. ISIS needs a whole lot of refined diesel/gasoline for their war machinery. It is a lot easier/cheaper to refine their own crude on-site in their territory than to deal with the expense/hassle of smuggling in a lot of refined product. Keeping the military trucks and tanks running – That is what those refineries are for – not for generating cash.
rockman on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 11:58 am
hv – All true. But have you seen exactly how they are getting the oil out? A pipeline would be an easy target. Everyone one knows exactly where they are located. And if they are moving the oil by tanker trucks it would take at least 500 to 1,000 trucks on the roads 24/hrs a day to move that much oil. That’s a lot of easy targets. And where are the wells producing that oil…they aren’t mobile and would be rather simple to spot/target from a satellite. And from where are they exporting that large volume of oil being shipped out of the country daily? This would be a big operation and not easily hidden.
This story of big ISIS oil exports seems to have a lot of holes in it. This isn’t like smuggling 100 kilos of dope across the Rio Grande River. I couldn’t move one tanker load from a well in Nigeria or Venezuela if the US govt wanted to stop me. The more I think on it the more this story doesn’t make sense. We destroyed the German oil production at Ploiesti during WWII and it was defended by AAA and German fighters. So we can’t take out the ISIS oil???
I’m actually started to feel someone is lying their ass off. LOL.
ghung on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 12:09 pm
In this age of asymmetrical warfare it’s not terribly difficult to locate these mobile, makeshift oil refineries with surveillance drones and satellites. I’m sure those folks are working overtime. Upload precise GPS coordinates into a drone or Tomahawk missile and cut it lose. Cost shouldn’t be an issue. The first ‘combat’ kill for the $190 million F-22 was reportedly an old F-150 pickup truck; a relative bargain considering the Pilot will live another day to blow up more pickup trucks.
Collateral damage is a secondary concern when there’s very little accountability. You have to break some eggs to make an ISIS omelette, eh? Besides, how do we know those women and children weren’t collaborating with the ISIS scourge, or breeding more recruits/targets for the next 30 years of GDP-boosting conflict?
kervennic on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 5:53 pm
western cicilisation is fucked. Isis is the gengis khan of the fossil fuel empire.
It will slowly eat up its way through a weaken society.
Nobody is ready to die to defend the westerm society.
Davy on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 6:43 pm
Ker, there are some tough rednecks around here that would love to kick some ISIL ass. You take away the guns from these ISIL tirds and they are nothing but pussies. You know this to be the case because the meanest people are the biggest cowards and fakes.
ghung on Thu, 9th Oct 2014 6:58 pm
kervennic must think the Middle East is the only place on Earth populated by heavily armed sociopaths. Funny, that.
Apneaman on Fri, 10th Oct 2014 1:17 pm
“Nobody is ready to die to defend the westerm society.”
That men are ready to die is mostly a myth, nor is it necessary. You only need men ready to kill, yet even that is harder then our myths would suggest. I would never take anything away from the soldiers who fought in WWII, but in the U.S. the majority of them had to be drafted. It was the reverse for Vietnam, but most people think the opposite is true in both cases. Hollywood history. If you invade another man’s country then he might be willing to die. Wars of aggression (resources) to further enrich a small elite? Not so much. In addition, societies that become completely corrupt and decadent (The west) do not produce the type of people who are will to make sacrifices….for any reason.
http://www.nationalww2museum.org/learn/education/for-students/ww2-history/ww2-by-the-numbers/us-military.html