Proof there's no way Iraqi oil could pay for rebuilding...

[mb7588a]

...and the Bush admin. knew it in December of 2002, in the thick of the preemptive debate.

This report completely strikes the notion that the preemptive strike and rebuilding of Iraq would pay for itself. How were they able to shove this down our throats? It seemed to simple. "Oh! Yeah, all that oil could certainly pay for it." But with these "grants" we keep giving Iraq, we won't be seeing any of that money coming back... I can't wait to find out who's pocket will be lined by the Iraqi oil money once its up to pre-1990 production levels, it won't be yours or mine.



http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraq.html#oil

In December 2002, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Baker Institute released a report on Iraq's oil sector. Among other things, the report concluded that: 1) Iraq's oil sector infrastructure is in bad shape at the moment, being held together by "band-aids," and with a production decline rate of 100,000 bbl/d per year; 2) increasing Iraqi oil production will require "massive repairs and reconstruction...costing several billions of dollars and taking months if not years;" 3) costs of repairing existing oil export installations alone would be around $5 billion, while restoring Iraqi oil production to pre-1990 levels would cost an additional $5 billion, plus $3 billion per year in annual operating costs; 4) outside funds and large-scale investment by international oil companies will be needed; 5) existing oil contracts will need to be clarified and resolved in order to rebuild Iraq's oil industry, with any "prolonged legal conflicts over contracts" possibly "delay the development of important fields in Iraq;" and 6) any "sudden or prolonged shut-down" of Iraq's oil industry could result in long-term reservoir damage; 7) Iraq's oil facilities could easily be damaged during any domestic unrest or military operations (in early February 2003, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan claimed that Iraqi soldiers were mining oil wells in the north of the country in anticipation of war); and 8) given all this, a "bonanza" of oil is not expected in the near future.

According to the Middle East Economic Survey (MEES), problems at Iraqi oil fields include: years of poor oil reservoir management; corrosion problems at various oil facilities; deterioration of water injection facilities; lack of spare parts, materials, equipment, etc.; damage to oil storage and pumping facilities; and more. MEES estimates that Iraq could reach production capacity of 4.2 million bbl/d within three years at a cost of $3.5 billion, and 4.5-6.0 million bbl/d within seven years.

[cliss]

1. Interesting, MB.

It makes you wonder: what's going on here? Let's see, the people that dreamed this up are "businessmen", like Bush, Cheney, and others. They "invested" in their oil wells: so far, we've invested about 440 lives, $160 billion in "wildcat cash", in the hopes that the oil bonanza is going to pay off big. I'm wondering: how much do they think they're going to make on this deal?

It really makes me wonder if they are businessmen at all. I've read that Iraq has the world's #2 biggest supply of nice, sweet light (sounds yummy doesn't it?) crude oil. Worth I believe $1 trillion dollars.

The only problem is: how are they going to get their hands on it? There are 22 million people sitting on top of that oil. Lots of them are actively opposed to the US getting any of it.

Does this sound like a well-thought out business idea to you?

[mb7588a]

2. well like i said,

it won't be the pockets of the DUers that get lined.

It does have the world's second largest oil reserve. It does not sound like a well thought-out business plan, but Bush is famous for failing businesses...

I also remember hearing that our gas prices would go down once the production was back up, but a big part of them going down was decreased exportation by Iraq because of the threats of war.

The oil side of this war is all so very confusing. So yes, I agree, what's going on here?

[DUreader]

3. kick