Kuwait wants 40% hike in oil and gas production by 2020

39 Comments on "Kuwait wants 40% hike in oil and gas production by 2020"

Rodster on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 8:00 am 



“Kuwait’s oil minister has confirmed plans to hike hydrocarbon production to 4 million barrels per day, by 2020, almost 40 percent more than the current level”

You can kiss 400PPM of CO2 goodbye. It’s now onto 450PPM and it won’t stop until BAU takes us to over 600PPM as well as 10 gigatons of methane waiting to be released into the atmosphere.

Nony on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 8:12 am 



Bring it on! Drench Jesus with oil!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bHZRSlhJxY

Davy on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 9:19 am 



You can do it NOo!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FodfkqfJrhQ

Plantagenet on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 12:09 pm 



Hmmm……I thought the current oil glut and the low oil prices were supposed to REDUCE new drilling and new oil production?

shortonoil on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 12:45 pm 



“We have discovered new reserves… that contain both oil and gas. This will support Kuwait’s plans to increase its production levels to a stable level of 4 million barrels per day by 2020,” Oil Minister Ali al-Omair said”

Every major oil company in the world has gone, over and over that chunk of sand for the last 100 years, but Kuwait has discovered new reserves? Now go buy a nice new freshly painted perpetual motion machine from them, and they’ll throw in two almost new bridges with the deal. We could wonder how much this has to do with the natives getting restless!

Nony on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 12:46 pm 



I want to drive fast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO9Qa7MpAvw

😉

Dmyers on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 1:15 pm 



“We have discovered new reserves…”
“…a stable level of 4 million barrels per day by 2020,”

Wow, a “stable level” is exactly what we need. No indication that they see this running out, ever.

Must be abiotic!

BobInget on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 2:27 pm 



WASHINGTON AND THE WORLD
Saudi Arabia’s Widening War
Obama is trying to make peace with Iran. The new Saudi king is on the course for war.
By GARY SICK June 04, 2015
Lead image by AP Photo.
221 Shares230 Shares14 SharesEmailCommentOne PagePrint

MOST POPULAR
Top Stories, Videos & Photos
Sean Hannity plays conservative kingmaker
Authoritarian Adventures With Photoshop
Democrats fret over recent Clinton polling
Obama’s interviews with local journalists don’t go as planned
The Middle East is falling apart
The level of turmoil in the Middle East is greater than at any other time in my nearly fifty years of watching this region. Amid this perfect storm comes the most dramatic shift in Saudi policy since at least World War II—marking a critical turning point in Saudi Arabia’s relations with its historical protector, the United States, and with its neighbors in the Middle East. The Saudi regime’s insistence on seeing threats to the Kingdom in fundamentally sectarian terms—Sunni vs. Shia—will put it increasingly at odds with its American patrons and could lead the Middle East into a conflict comparable to Europe’s Thirty Years War, a continent-wide civil war over religion that decimated an entire culture.

Driving the Saudi strategy is fear of Iranian regional hegemony. This wariness of Iran is nothing new, but, since the early days of the Clinton administration, Saudi Arabia has been able to rely on Washington to contain Iran. The United States surrounded Iran with its bases and troops, and imposed ever-increasing economic punishment on the Iranian revolutionary state. This policy began after the George H.W. Bush administration completed its brilliant military victory over Saddam Hussein’s forces, and as the Soviet Union was collapsing, leaving the United States as the sole military power in the Persian Gulf.

The Clinton administration had briefly considered balancing Iran or Iraq against the other as a way to maintain a degree of regional stability and to protect the smaller, oil-rich Arab states on the southern side of the Gulf. Policy of this sort had prevailed for the two decades prior to the Persian Gulf War. However, Martin Indyk, chief of Middle East policy at Clinton’s National Security Council, formally rejected this policy and announced a new “dual containment” policy. With Iraq boxed in by UN sanctions, and Iran nearly prostrate after eight years of war with Iraq, the United States had the “means to counter both the Iraqi and Iranian regimes,” declared Indyk. Now, he said, “we don’t need to rely on one to balance the other.”

The U.S. attempt to contain Iraq effectively ended when the Iraq War began. But the United States continued its containment strategy with Iran. This U.S. task became more difficult after the George W. Bush administration invaded Afghanistan and scattered the Taliban, Iran’s worst enemy to the east, and then attacked Saddam Hussein, Iran’s worst enemy to the west, and replaced him with a Shia government that was friendly to Iran. Although Iran’s contribution to this process was minimal, it became almost overnight the most influential state in the Persian Gulf. Iran’s regional influence continued to expand even as the United States applied ever-heavier sanctions.

Importantly, the US installation of a Shia government in Iraq also gave credence to the notion of an ongoing Iranian takeover of the Middle East and to the explanation of much of the turmoil that followed as a sectarian war inflamed by Iran. This perception has likely fed into Saudi Arabia’s momentous strategic reassessment.

President Obama is in the process of replacing the policy of containment with a policy of limited engagement with Iran. In effect, the United States has indicated that it will no longer be responsible for keeping Iran in “a box,” to use the metaphor Madeleine Albright applied to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. This policy shift has attracted vociferous opposition from almost every regional state, from Israel to Saudi Arabia. Countries in the region long ago grew accustomed to the U.S. acting as the regional sheriff, single-handedly ensuring that Iran remained isolated, politically neutralized and under pressure.

The Sunni Arab states of the region, ironically, adopted the rhetoric of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, warning that Iran was actively seeking development of a nuclear weapon and that would potentially represent a threat to any state that opposed Iran’s actions in the region. Partly in response to such concerns, the United States pursued negotiations to cut off Iranian access to a nuclear weapon. To the surprise of almost everyone, that effort resulted in a detailed preliminary agreement in November 2013 and a formal declaration of the parameters of a final agreement in Lausanne on April 2, 2015. The drafting of the final agreement is well underway.

Although this prospective agreement would dramatically reduce the likelihood of Iran developing a nuclear weapon, the reaction to it from Israel and the Arab Gulf states has been close to hysteria. This reaction strongly suggests that the underlying concern of the Gulf states, and of Israel, was not really the danger of Iranian nuclear weapons, but rather the threat of Iran’s burgeoning political influence in the region, from Iraq to Syria to Lebanon and lately even to impoverished Yemen. Apparently the fear was that the relief from sanctions, along with Iran’s demonstration of skill in negotiating an agreement with the most powerful nations on earth, would enhance Iran’s political influence throughout the region.

Israel’s security elite has for the most part rejected Prime Minister Netanyahu’s cries of imminent peril, and the top Arab leaders of the Gulf apparently found reassurance in their recent meeting with President Obama at the White House and Camp David. In reality, neither the Arabs nor Israel has any practical alternative to alliance with the United States. Still, resistance to Obama’s policy shift remains very powerful in the U.S. Congress, in the Israeli leadership and in a skeptical Sunni Arab world that sees its interests and regional influence at risk in the face of an ascendant Iran.

Given the specter of a rising Iran, and a US shift from a policy of containment to partial engagement, it’s not surprising that Saudi Arabia would re-evaluate its foreign policy. But the speed of the strategic shift, and its magnitude, have been stunning.

READ MORE

THE FRIDAY COVER
Is Iowa Over?
By DAVE PRICE
A students walks in front of the Old Main building on the Penn State campus Friday, Nov. 11, 2011, in State College, Pa. The Penn State University board of trustees who fired legendary football coach Joe Paterno and school president Graham Spanier are meeting Friday in the wake of the massive shakeup prompted by a child sex-abuse scandal. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)
OPINION
PC Liberals Devour Their Own
By RICH LOWRY
NEW YORK – MARCH 10: Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks to the media after keynoting a Women’s Empowerment Event at the United Nations March 10, 2015 in New York City. Clinton answered questions about recent allegations of an improperly used email account during her tenure as secretary of state. (Photo by Yana Paskova/Getty Images)
FOURTH ESTATE
Hillary’s Popularity Rollercoaster
By JACK SHAFER
For many decades, Saudi Arabia had played the classic role of a weak state with a single compelling resource—oil money. It cultivated powerful protectors and used its influence behind the scenes to promote outcomes that it could not hope to produce on its own. Saudi caution was legendary, and with a very few prominent exceptions it avoided taking the lead or putting itself out in front of controversial policies.

Indeed, the United States and many other countries owe a great deal to the sober and conscientious policies that Saudi Arabia has followed, particularly with regard to all-important oil policies. I’m sure that every serious Middle East observer could find examples of what they would regard as Saudi missteps or missed opportunities. But what other authoritarian state in that troubled region would you chose to manage a pool of resources with profound effect on every person and every economy in the world?

That quiet diligence appears to be vanishing after a change at the helm—the succession to the throne of King Salman and his installation of a notably young array of deputies and ministers. Within only the first three months of his reign, the new king has transformed the structure of the Saudi government and has resolved what most Saudi watchers considered the most complicated issue facing the Kingdom—how to make the leap from the old generation (the sons of the founding king) to the next generation. For the past 83 years, the Saudi crown has been passed from brother to brother rather than from father to son. King Salman, at 79, will likely be the last of his generation to rule.

The new crown prince, the King’s nephew Mohammed bin Nayef, is fifty-five and the deputy crown prince—the King’s favorite son Mohammed bin Salman—is about thirty. These two not only command the line of succession but also, via two new super-committees, are in charge of virtually every major institution in the Kingdom (with the key exception of the National Guard). The younger generation has gone almost instantly from being princes-in-waiting to controlling the main elements of power in the Kingdom.

Gary Sick, a scholar at Columbia University, served on the National Security Council under Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan and was the principal White House aide for Iran during the Iranian Revolution and the hostage crisis. This article is published in collaboration with the

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/saudi-arabia-is-heading-towards-war-118656.html#ixzz3cDXuCnQK

GregT on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 2:46 pm 



“I want to drive fast.”

No doubt you will Nony, right into the brick wall of reality. You’re only going to get one opportunity to slow down and pull off of the road. Miss that opportunity and you will pay the consequences.

Perk Earl on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 6:27 pm 



“You can kiss 400PPM of CO2 goodbye. It’s now onto 450PPM and it won’t stop until BAU takes us to over 600PPM as well as 10 gigatons of methane waiting to be released into the atmosphere.”

Rodster, the colors will be something to see with anoxic purple oceans and green skies.

GregT on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 7:34 pm 



Stock up on oxygen if you want to see the cool new colors. H2S is deadly below 100ppm.

Makati1 on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 8:05 pm 



Ah yes, we do live in interesting times…

Rodster on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 11:41 pm 



“Rodster, the colors will be something to see with anoxic purple oceans and green skies.”

You just described China 😛

Kenjamkov on Fri, 5th Jun 2015 11:47 pm 



How big is Kuwait? Where did they find new reserves? Oh wait, according to OPEC, their production is a % of their reserves. I think I see now. Gonna buy us some solar panels pronto!

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 12:10 am 



Rodster,

Unfortunately China happens to be a country on the same planet that we all live on. China is not polluting the Earth manufacturing goods for the Chinese, it is us in the West that are demanding those goods. It is the West (us) that are exporting our pollution to the East.

The reality of the matter is, the pollution that we are exporting to the East, does not stay in the East.

Davy on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 5:38 am 



Greg, the Chinese are big boys and can say no to the pollution producing industrialization. Who told the Chinese they had to pollute? Does the US have a gun to their head saying “produce shit and export to me or else”? No Greg, the Chinese are just greedy and out to make a buck.

China and Asia are the number one environmental criminals on planet earth. They are guilty of overpopulation and overconsumption. The US is guilty too but Asia’s pollution producing industrialization is off the charts. The numbers and the results don’t lie.

Rodster on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 5:54 am 



“China is not polluting the Earth manufacturing goods for the Chinese, it is us in the West that are demanding those goods”

Unfortunately, China has a propensity and long history for doing stuff just like this without our help. It’s in their culture to take short cuts in favor of profits. I remember reading a story where back in 2007 there were street vendors who were selling food that was contaminated with formaldehyde and cardboard used as fillers of the product.

They also have the option of doing the right thing to wrt their environment but choose not to. One only can shake their head when reading about a lake that spews sulphur and other toxic chemicals from their high tech mfg process. Whether we buy from them or another country does pollution doesn’t matter to them. It’s all about the almighty Yuan. They not we destroyed 60% of the drinking water. Their water situation is so bad that “it’s not fit for human contact instead of unfit for human consumption”. That’s how much they have polluted their fresh water supply.

They and not we are responsible for the garbage mountains they create in residential neighborhoods that are somtimes 9-10 storys high of garbage.

Rodster on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:01 am 



And how could I forget about “Chinese Drywall”? They have a long and proven track record for not caring about others.

Rodster on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:05 am 



I also forgot to mention that Apple’s recent record iPhone sales were on the backs of sales to Chinese consumers. China has been in the process for some time now to switch from an export to a consumption based economy.

Davy on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:11 am 



Rodster, I totally agree. I am not saying the US is not bad. In fact the historical picture is very poor for the US and still is. My point is China is off the charts in BAD. People saying we are exporting pollution there are only partially right because the Chinese don’t have to be export driven economies with little concern for their environment. The Chinese have chosen the road to development in their own self-interest not ours.

Rodster on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 7:39 am 



It appears the 2007 street vendor story was a hoax and arrests were made after it was discovered it was a hoax.

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 10:39 am 



When I go into any of the ‘big box’ stores around here guys, I’m not seeing any Chinese branded ‘goods’. It’s mostly American brands with tiny little stickers that say ‘Made in China’. The big American multinationals have off shored labour to turn bigger profits. It’s all about the bottom line, they could care less about anything else.

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 11:10 am 



“China has been in the process for some time now to switch from an export to a consumption based economy.”

Not only have we been exporting our pollution to China, we have also exported our technology, and infrastructure. The Chinese aren’t stupid people. They want the American dream as much as everybody else, and they would much rather make 15 dollars an hour, than 15 dollars a week.

Apneaman on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 12:15 pm 



China is late to the techno industrial game and the majority of their people will not see the dream, but rather feel the nightmare of being an externality. I think about 5% of their people have reached some form of middle class status, which means if they don’t keep pushing to include a lot more they will have trouble. At the same time they have many citizens pushing back on the environmental front. It’s a pickle same as here, but on a greater scale. White ape, brown ape, round eyed ape, slant eyed ape, it’s all the same. None of us are really in control and the differences in cultural are just that cultural differences. All the same malignant cancerous behaviors and story telling ability to pretend to justify our collective inability to stop or blame the other guy. We will never stop degrading energy. Yeast does not volunteer to stop or slow down on the sugar smorgasbord and neither can maladaptive apes. In the big picture it is no ones fault, but that does not mean our lives and the lives of our immediate descendants can not be improved or steps taken to lessen the coming suffering. More importantly, if your not willing to do something to prevent these forces that want it all, then your asking for it. They will go as far as we let them. Just cutting back on consuming weakens them. Americans familiar with their history should know that many of their colonial ancestors did exactly that during the times that tried men’s souls. Many stopped buying manufactured goods from Britain – yep they went without – sacrifice. They refused to be slaves to consumer goods and it hurt the British. Of course that was prior to “The Economy” being the new god we worship and sacrifice most of our lives to.

Davy on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 4:51 pm 



Greg, a word of advice to my best friend on this board, China is a turd. They are a great people. They gave me green tea and the wisdom of Tao. I admire the Chinese in so many ways but not what I see today in China at all in any way.

You are far better defending or talking up Russia who is probably one of the best places to be to weather the coming collapse. That is if the Chinese hordes of desperate people do not over run them. Russia has so much to admire. It has low population density, ample resources, educated population, and decent infrastructure. It may be better placed for climate change adjustments although the jury is out on what climate change will actually do and when.

China is in overshoot with population and consumption. It is in ecological failure throughout the country. It has destroyed its earlier resilience by constructing western style energy intensive complex cities and infrastructure. It is an export driven economy that will never go consumer. Export economies will die shortly when the financial crisis intensifies. There is no time for a consumer China nor enough earth resources.

Stick with Russia I imagine they will be the champions in the end.

Davy on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 4:52 pm 



Well said Ape Man

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 5:22 pm 



Davy,

Spend a couple of days in Vancouver BC, and it won’t take you long to figure out what I think of China.

Just because I call out American capitalists for the rise of China, doesn’t mean that I’m choosing sides. This topic has been discussed in every coffee shop from Seattle to Orlando. American manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas by American multinational corporations. 90% or more, of all consumer crap in our stores here, are being manufactured in Asia by American companies. I don’t like it any more than you do.

No country is going to get through the coming bottleneck unscathed, but if I were a betting man, I would bet that a larger percentage of Canadians won’t make it than the percentage of Asians. The same for the US. We are three generations removed from sustenance living here Davy, Most people are so specialized in North America, that they would have difficulty using a screwdriver, let alone taking care of themselves. Hell Davy, most people in the cities don’t even know how to cook anymore.

Apneaman on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 5:47 pm 



Greg, I knew we were lost when they came out with microwave Kraft Dinner.

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 5:49 pm 



According to statistics, 80.7% of the US populous lived in urban areas in 2010, the number has grown since then. In Canada, it is closer to 90%.

In China, in 2014, 37% of the population lived in urban areas. The rest are still dirt poor sustenance farmers with little to no incomes.

http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-03-20/china-wants-its-people-in-the-cities

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 5:49 pm 



Microwave Kraft dinner? Your kidding?

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:00 pm 



How To Make One-Bowl Microwave Macaroni and Cheese
COOKING LESSONS FROM THE KITCHN

Lessons from the kitchn? It appears that we’ve forgotten how to spell too. Which has been my daily experience, in correspondence with my coworkers.

http://www.thekitchn.com/how-to-make-one-bowl-microwave-macaroni-and-cheese-cooking-lessons-from-the-kitchen-94006

That’s a pretty complicated recipe. Much easier to order in.

Davy on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:18 pm 



Greg, China’s rural areas are cities by American standards. We will just have to disagree on China. China had a good thing going 20years ago other than over population. Now the population is worse, their land destroyed, and the traditional culture disrupted by industrialization. They are not their grandparents China. China and also India are going to fly apart in a shit storm of hungry masses in destroyed lands.

Apneaman on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:34 pm 



China, Coal. Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid.

The Guardian’s investigation into China’s coal addiction contains some startling facts.

“Air pollution in China, from its factories and power stations, has got so bad that it kills over half a million people a year.”

http://m.motherjones.com/environment/2015/06/china-coal-carbon-climate-guardian

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:35 pm 



Take oil out of the equation Davy, and the entire world is going to fly apart in a shit storm of hungry masses.

The only people anywhere that will have any hope of getting through this shitstorm, will be the people like you, that have returned to the farms. Or the people that never left them to begin with.

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:46 pm 



The huge increase in coal-fired power stations in China has masked the impact of global warming in the last decade because of the cooling effect of their sulphur emissions, new research has revealed. But scientists warn that rapid warming is likely to resume when the short-lived sulphur pollution – which also causes acid rain – is cleaned up and the full heating effect of long-lived carbon dioxide is felt.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jul/04/sulphur-pollution-china-coal-climate

Maybe we should be thanking them?

Apneaman on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 6:58 pm 



BBC Global Dimming Doc

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x22692o_bbc-horizon-2005-global-dimming_shortfilms

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 7:39 pm 



One of the reasons why the scientific community no longer calls it global warming. If we stall the gulf stream, we’ll have far more serious issues to deal with than an ice age.

Apneaman on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 8:31 pm 



So that Global Dimming doc was made in 2005 and the big piece of evidence was in 2001 and that was just the cessation of vapor from air travel and only in the US and only for a few days that spiked the temps. Imagine a major global economic hit where not only a big portion of global air traffic halts, but industry and ground and marine transportation have a major reduction as well. Within days the toxic protective blanket of energy deflecting particles will start to fall back to earth; most of it will take just a couple of weeks. The estimates of temperature increase are upwards of around 1.5 degrees C – snap just like that. There’s our predicament.

GregT on Sat, 6th Jun 2015 8:58 pm 



One of many predicaments Apnea. The ‘perfect storm’ is brewing on the horizon.