Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on February 17, 2014
Iran says Russia could build nuclear reactor in exchange for oil
Russia could build a second reactor at Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant in exchange for Iranian oil, the Iranian ambassador to Moscow said in remarks published on Monday.
Russia could also supply Iran with trucks, railroad tracks, mini-refineries or other goods to pay for the oil, ambassador Mehdi Sanaei told the daily Kommersant, under a deal Reuters revealed was being negotiated last month.
Reuters reported Iran and Russia were negotiating to swap up to 500,000 barrels of oil per day for goods in the deal that would undermine Western efforts to maintain economic pressure on Tehran while global powers seek to curb its nuclear program.
In an interview published a day before the six powers including Russia resume talks with Tehran on a nuclear deal, Sanaei confirmed Russia and Iran were discussing supplies of “a few hundred thousand barrels per day”.
“Iran could use some of the proceeds (to pay for) the construction by Russia companies of a second unit at the nuclear power plant in Bushehr,” he said. Russia built the first reactor at Bushehr, Iran’s sole nuclear power plant.
Sanaei said it was possible the oil deal, and a broad memorandum on economic cooperation, could be signed before August. Russian Economy Minister Alexei Ulyukayev is to visit Iran in April for talks on trade.
Asked what Russia could supply in exchange for the oil, Sanaei said the sides were discussing a number of possibilities including the construction of small oil refineries, Russian investment in gas fields and supplies of electricity.
TRUCKS, TRACKS, GRAIN
In addition to the possibility of Russia building a second reactor at Bushehr, he said Tehran was interested in supplies of heavy trucks or their assembly in Iran, and other items.
“Iran is interested in buying a huge amount of railroad tracks from Russia, as well as Russian involvement in the electrification of its railways. We are also interested in Russian grain.”
Western nations fear an oil-swap deal would badly hurt efforts to forge a permanent agreement ensuring Iran’s nuclear program could not be used to make weapons in exchange for sanctions relief. An interim deal was reached in January.
A top U.S. official said this month she believed the oil-for-goods swap would not go ahead in the near future after the United States warned both sides it would make reaching a nuclear agreement “more difficult if not impossible”.
Sanaei dismissed the U.S. concerns and said Russia should do the same, warning that European nations have sent business delegations to Iran and that Moscow risked losing lucrative opportunities if it failed to act fast.
“Our Russian friends, who have stood by us at difficult moments, should have advantages on the Iranian market … But Russian companies must hurry to get into their niche in our market and not hesitate out of fear of Western sanctions,” he said.
Russia approved four rounds of U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program but has sharply criticized additional measures imposed by the United States and European Union, calling them counterproductive.
The United States for years urged Russia to scrap its contract to build Bushehr, saying the project could help Tehran develop nuclear weapons capability. However, a deal requiring Iran to return spent fuel to Russia greatly eased those concerns.
6 Comments on "Iran says Russia could build nuclear reactor in exchange for oil"
Makati1 on Mon, 17th Feb 2014 1:33 pm
Russia is not afraid of the Empire. It actually wants to see it go away. I suspect that China is also busy negotiating new deals with Iran. Interesting times.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Mon, 17th Feb 2014 2:15 pm
Iranians are not stupid. Some good ideas listed. I wonder about all this nuclear power in an unstable region. Isn’t it plain to see the problems with proliferation and waste disposal from a self-centered Iranian point of view? These issues are handicaps in my mind. Just look at Europe and Japan divesting out of Nuk power! Think of the tremendous effort and money that will be needed to manage these issues by countries like Iran. We already see this in Japan. Look at the earthquake issues already in Iran. All this when we see them in overshoot with their population, pollution issues, severe water shortages. The Iranians are maybe too smart for themselves. I might add empire driven themselves. We have all read about Persia and the Muslim empire of the so called dark ages in Europe. Those thoughts must still tickle their fancy. I believe a different low tech sustainable strategy would be so much more to their advantage. Yet, they are ultimately ruled by ideologues and we know where that leads.
Arthur on Mon, 17th Feb 2014 3:25 pm
Barter in action, the trade of the future, going to be big after the demise/acceptance of the fiat currencies.
Davy is right of course, about proliferation. No need to demonize the Iranians, but if rogue states like Pakistan, Israel and North-Korea can develop them, why not Iran? Perhaps they do, perhaps they don’t develop them.
DC on Mon, 17th Feb 2014 5:54 pm
Lets hope they do, the amerikans will be positively pissing themselves with rage if even a 10th of what this article is saying comes about. Expect the US to go all-out with everything from its pasty faced moronic ‘secretary of state’, to increased economic warfare, to actual warfare via its terrorist proxies, ie MEK and so on. If there is one thing the US hates more than democracy, its states not subject to its cartels bartering and exchanging goods directly. Bypassing the petro-dollar is the #1 crime as far as the uS and its cabal of globalist banksters is concerned.
-Davy, Iran is not an ‘unstable’ country. Its actually very stable. That doesn’t mean nuclear power is a good idea of course, its not. If any of the amerikans that profess to be so worried about instability in the region want to do something about it, write the uSgov, the british govt, and APAIC and ask them to all to stop their constant meddling and subversion. That would take care of over 90% of the ‘instability’ in one pass.
In any event, Iranian ‘nukes’ wont have any effect on anyones lives here, not one little bit. North Americans should be far more concerned about the 100+ indifferently maintained, ‘corporate-owned’ nukes in the ‘homeland’ of the uS. Those are only about oh, a million times more deadly to most of us here than anything going on in Iran ever could, or will be.
MSN fanboy on Mon, 17th Feb 2014 5:57 pm
Sooo. more oil being produced.. me thinks the doomers are the only guys smacking their heads into limits. Peak Collapse bullshit!
Hey Makati ‘and the beat goes on’ ROLF
Davy, Hermann, MO on Mon, 17th Feb 2014 7:56 pm
@DC – I just don’t buy into your argument completely. Some of it has always been true of course historically. These types of geopolitical conflicts are bad for business for all concerned except a few who use conflict to profit. We know who they are and so do the people in charge. Now that business is getting bad to worse I believe there are some pragmatic moderates on both sides thinking there is a better path forward. Your characterizations of North Americans is too generalized for me. I know several Iranians great people. I think in general the majority of the two populations are tired of the BS from minority hardliners on both sides.