[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', '[')b]Iran Seen by IEA Unable to Sustain Increase in Crude Exports

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')ran, once OPEC’s second-largest oil producer, will be unable to sustain an increase in crude exports that support its economy when some measures to curb those shipments are eased, the International Energy Agency said.

The European Union said last month that it intends to suspend a ban in December or January on insuring tankers carrying Iranian oil. The U.S. said it will stop forcing buyers to cut purchases, even if they still aren’t allowed to increase them. The concessions are in return for commitments from the Persian Gulf state to provide more information on its nuclear program, which western powers claim is intended to make weapons. Neither the EU nor the U.S. lifted sanctions on importing the nation’s oil.

[Threepwood]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')O2 emissions

[Graeme]

Oil Sales Boost Shows Obama’s Iran Shift

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')dministration officials have gotten a pasting this week as they’ve tried to convince Congress not to pass another round of even tougher sanctions on Iran. Try as they might to persuade both Democrats and Republicans to table efforts to squeeze the Islamist regime to give up their nuclear ambition, many members of both the Senate and the House don’t see the logic in a stand that sees any further pressure as weakening the chances of diplomatic success. So in an effort to bolster their dubious position, the administration announced today that it would expand the list of individuals and businesses targeted by the existing sanctions. The New York Times billed the measure as “new sanctions,” which is not true. What the government is doing is merely following existing laws that have not been zealously enforced.

The decision to crack down on companies that have helped facilitate Iran’s oil sales or collaborated on its nuclear and missile programs is welcome. But it is also a belated recognition that despite the bragging about the impact of sanctions that has been heard from both the State Department and the White House, economic restrictions on doing business with Iran have not been uniformly effective. The Times reported three years ago that over 10,000 exemptions had been granted by the Treasury Department to do business with Iran, a number that has certainly grown in the interim. And the Daily Beast reported recently that this year the same department had slowed down its work opening investigations of possible sanctions violators.

[ROCKMAN]

T – “I think what we have here is a failure to communicate.”. I don’t really think so. I think we’re each just emphasizing different parts of the same beast. I don’t think either one of us is saying anything incorrect per se. Had the tite oil play not succeeded it would have been because oil prices weren’t high enough to justify it. Had oil prices not boomed we wouldn’t be paying so much more for oil and shipping more money overseas for our imports than we were not too long ago.

One could ask what have we benefited from the shale oil boom. Yes…more domestic production. But that only happened because some parts of the economy have been able to afford a 300% increase in price. But others haven’t which is why our imports have fallen. But the lower import volume costs us more now than it did when we were importing more oil thanks to the price increase.

It’s why I keep bouncing back to the POD…Peak Oil Dynamic. It explains why we have the shale boom and increased US production both of which are a function of why the US oil bill has risen 300% and our oil trade deficit (in $’s) has worsened. Your emphasizing the production increase and I’m emphasizing the cost increase. Both are correct in that they are both appendages of this POD beast. You like the piece you’re holding on to but I don’t like what I have I my hand. But it all belongs to the same freaking werewolf. LOL.