Or...Enter your Email


Useful Sites



[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]




Why the Chinese Will Win the Global Oil Game

Contrarian Profits (October 16th, 2008) Writes:

The rules of the global oil games are changing, says Keith Fitz-Gerald. And China — not the US — is leading the way. China doesn’t worry about the political leanings or dubious human rights of its energy suppliers. It needs a steady supply of oil to fuel its economic boom…and it will do what it takes to get it.

This from Money Morning:

Iraq recently signed its first oil deal in 35 years with a foreign company.

And –- quite surprisingly to many observers -– the company wasn’t one of ours.

Not surprisingly, the US news media barely acknowledged the deal –- even though the agreement was major news throughout the rest of the world.

According to reports from Baghdad, the 22-year deal between the Iraqi government and the China National Petroleum Co. involves $55 billion, or 87% of Iraq’s current total revenue at a conservative long-term estimate

...
Tags for this Post:
Africa, Assim Jihad, Baghdad, BP PLC, Burma, captive oil suppliers, chevron corp, China, China National Petroleum Co ., contrarian profits, crude oil, Electricity, energy information administration, energy suppliers, ExxonMobil Corp., foreign oil, Ibrahim Bahr al-Ulum, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Iraq's Oil Ministry, Iraqi Government, Iraqi Oil Ministry, Islamic Republic of Iran, Keith Fitz-Gerald, long-term energy supplies, long-term oil supplies, Market Commentary, Middle East, news media, Oil, oil agreements, oil deal, oil field southeast, oil game, oil games, Oil Interests, oil ownership, Oil Prices, oil purchases, oil services, oil workers, oil-rich nations, Peru, Royal Dutch Shell plc, Russia, Saddam Hussein-led, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Supply Chain, the New York Times, the Times, TOTAL SA, United States, USD, Venezuela, Vietnam

The Russia-Venezuela Energy Colossus

Robert Amsterdam (September 27th, 2008) Writes:
moscow092708.jpgBack in 2004, I remember discussing the disturbing political convergence happening in both Russia and Venezuela with an American journalist, arguing that a unique blend of resource nationalism, populism, and repressive authoritarianism was beginning to take root in parallel processes, eventually establishing the basis for a new alliance. I was quite nearly laughed out of the office of this journalist, who refused to believe that there was any reason to take Russia's new diplomatic efforts in Latin America, and its relationship with Venezuela's Hugo Chavez especially, with any degree of sincerity or concern. Somehow I don't think that I would have quite as much trouble pushing that argument today. For those looking for a quick catch-up piece, Ellen Barry's article in today's New York Times lays out the latest critical developments, including the Medvedev-Chavez orchestrated oil deal which ...

China-Chavez Oil Deal Shows Just How Weak America Is

Contrarian Profits (September 24th, 2008) Writes:

If you need more proof that the US lost the Cold War to Russia and China you need look no further than Venezuela, says emerging markets expert Irwin Greenstein, writing for Contrarian Profit. Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela, inked two significant energy deals with China and Russia that will divert American oil to our former Cold War adversaries.

What further proof do we need that we lost the Cold War than to have China and Russia take over critical oil supplies right in our own backyard?

Americans like to believe that the 40-odd-year Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s and the early 1990s. That’s when Ronald Regan was president and the Berlin Wall came tumbling down and the Soviet Union collapsed. (That led Dick Cheney to also tout Reagan’s famous fiscal theory that deficits don’t matter.)

With the …

A new dynamic for the Middle East

James Hamilton (September 3rd, 2008) Writes:

Maybe it's time to try something new. And maybe it's already starting.

Last week the New York Times reported:

In the first major oil deal Iraq has made with a foreign country since 2003, the Iraqi government and the China National Petroleum Corporation have signed a contract in Beijing that could be worth up to $3 billion, Iraqi officials said Thursday.

Under the new contract, which must still be approved by Iraq's cabinet, the Chinese company will provide technical advisers, oil workers and equipment to help develop the Ahdab oil field southeast of Baghdad, according to Assim Jihad, a spokesman for Iraq's Oil Ministry. If the deal is approved, work could begin on the oil field within a few months, Mr. Jihad said.

And today the Guardian confirms that the deal was approved by Iraq's cabinet.

There are some Americans who regard expanding Chinese global influence with fear and suspicion. But

...

China and Iraq signs $3 billion oil deal

Tony Sagami (August 29th, 2008) Writes:
This proves how serious China is about securing access to the natural resources it needs to fuel it growth ambitions. The Iraqi government and the China National Petroleum Corporation have signed a contract that could be worth up to $3 billion.

Energy Blast - Aug 20, 2008

Robert Amsterdam (August 20th, 2008) Writes:
Iraq's oil minister has repudiated a Saddam Hussein-era contract with LUKOIL on grounds that it was "totally unfair.” Conversely, Iraq is reportedly on the verge of reviving an 11-year-old contract with China worth $1.2 billion, which would be its largest oil deal since the invasion in 2003. The Canadian prime minister says that gas dealings with Russia are being reconsidered in light of Georgian conflict. “From the beginning, oil and gas transmission has been at the centre of conflict [between Russia and Georgia].” Prime Minister Vladimir Putin reportedly supports the idea of granting equal access to Gazprom’s pipelines for independent gas producers. Mechel will be forced to reduce coal prices for the steel sector by 15% - less than previously feared.

Newsletter

First Name:

Email:


More Options

No recommendations, either expressed or implied, are being made to buy, sell, hold or short any of the mentioned stocks. No legal, tax or accounting advice is expressed or implied. Always contact your attorney, CPA, or tax advisor before acting on any legal or tax issues. StraightStocks.com is not responsible for the content, products, or services of any of the advertisers on this site. StraightStocks.com receives compensation from advertisers on this blog. Services and products referred to herein are trademarks, registered trademarks, servicemarks, and/or registered servicemarks of their respective trademark or servicemark owners.