Nervous U.S. Navy Eyes on Bahrain

Oil. And Israel.
.
A succinct three-word summary of our foreign policy in that part of the world.

Easily fixed. Lift the GOM moratorium and drilling elsewhere in the US

Easily fixed? Good grief so let’s start drilling now and maybe 5 to 10 years from now we will have replaced 10% of the oil we import assuming the oil even stayed here.

And you do know the oil we drill here does not necessarily stay her don’t you? The US does not own it, The oil companies that do the drilling own it and it all goes into the world market. So it could just as easily end up in China as here. You know that whole free market thing.

So if this is an easy fix I would sure like to know what a hard one looks like.

Well put, afguy. It’s amazing that we put up with all that grief over there given that even Saudi Arabia is NOT our largest exporter: Canada is, followed by Mexico.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
.
Thanks, Mark for these updates. I hope you follow up on comparing the ME drama over oil vs. the relatively saner trades with Canada and Mexico (over oil, of course, not drugs, but that’s another security matter entirely), Sarah Palin’s TransCanada pipeline proposal excepted, of course.
http://eyeonthearctic.rcinet.ca/en/news/usa/100-business/709-transcanada-gas-line-alternatives-floated-in-alaska-legislature

“Unpleasantness”
.
The people want a constitution that would share power and opportunity while punishing those that torture and corrupt, yet we can’t support them as it might impact the oil industry. Very unpleasant indeed.
.
And yeah, sounds familiar.

Oil is a fungible commodity, any barrel is equivalent regardless of where it comes from. Our dependence on the Middle East, and Saudia Arabia in particular, comes not from direct import of thier oil, but the fact that as an oil cartel (OPEC), and the largest producers of oil, they have the major say in the global price. This relationship days pay off sometimes, for example I remember a few years ago that Iran wanted to cut production, and the Saudis didn’t agree to it, and they walked out of a OPEC meeting. But it is a problem. The solution, although not an easy one, is not to reduce dependence on foreign oil, but to reduce dependence on oil period.

I think some tried to raise that flag back at the time of the first oil shortage (1970′s) but were poo-pooed for trying to rain on the “great American lifestyle” parade.
.
Ignoring that particular alligator isn’t going to prevent it from biting us (no matter how much we close our eyes and click our heels and try to wish away the problem).

“Easily fixed? Good grief so let’s start drilling now and maybe 5 to 10 years from now we will have replaced 10% of the oil we import assuming the oil even stayed here.
.
See we have been getting this lame argument for over 20 years. How much oil could we have pumped in that time? Adding jobs and GDP growth as well.
.
Why don’t we here the 5 to 10 years development time for alt energy and dismiss that? Systematically our oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear industries are being dismantled and the alt energy answers are still years away. Prices will rise for energy then we will here the usual vilifying of energy companies for gouging (always unproven) when oil hits $100, nat gas $10 and gasoline $5. Never is there a consideration that the wound is self-inflicted

“Oil is a fungible commodity, any barrel is equivalent regardless of where it comes from”
.
That is not entirely accurate. Crude oil in various parts of the world come in various grades based on density (heavy vs light) and sulphur content (sweet vs sour). The type of crude feedstock impacts the yield and type of product produced from gasoline to kerosene to asphalt. And all refineries cannot process all grades of crude oil

Nuclear industries being dismantled? Since when? $36 billion in Federal loan guarantees in this year’s budget to the nuclear industry for new reactors is not what i call dismantling the nuclear industry.

Why don’t we here the 5 to 10 years development time for alt energy and dismiss that?
.
Because once a viable fuel alternative is widely used it “solves the problem” (while “Adding jobs and GDP growth as well” via US owned companies). The investment will pay off in that we won’t have wild price fluctuations depending on what’s happening in the most volatile regions of the world, we won’t have to send the military to police those producing regions, and of course environmental concerns.
.
If done safely and within realistic guidelines, domestic drilling is fine and 5 – 10 years of new-drill-site development would add jobs, growth and supply.. yet those problems remain.

Fungible. Yep. Which means, of course, that it doesn’t matter whether the head of state in Venezuela or Iran or Bahrain thinks of the US. The only thing states sitting on oil can do is sell it into world markets. Bilateral deals, of course, just reduce the general demand.
.
Of course, when Saddam ruled Iraq, US oil companies didn’t have the contracts. Made no difference to the US economy that this was so, just as it makes no difference now that production levels are back up and the US companies have the concessions.
.
Who the US supports in these states is not about national security, access to oil supplies or an orderly world petroleum market. The latter was established following the embargo, and is extremely tolerant of changes in ruling regime–even extreme changes in regime.
.
So it’s not even, really, about the oil. It’s about who collects the economic rent on sources of cheaply extracted petroleum.

Don’t tell me our $150 billion navy might have to put to sea.

“Nuclear industries being dismantled? Since when? $36 billion in Federal loan guarantees in this year’s budget to the nuclear industry for new reactors is not what i call dismantling the nuclear industry”
.
When was the last nuclear plant built in the US. Because of enviro- nuts it will take 15-20 for any new plant to be built. What is budgeted and what is spent are completely different subjects.
.
“If done safely and within realistic guidelines, domestic drilling is fine and 5 – 10 years of new-drill-site development would add jobs, growth and supply.. yet those problems remain”
.
I am not saying we don’t need a comprehensive energy policy. Bu that doesn’t mean if it takes 5-10 years for oil production to ignore it. In the short run it would provide jobs growth and price stability and security. Concurrently we need to address alt fuels. But the real dirty little secret with alt sources are the environmentalists. Remember the wind farms off Nantucket? Hydro power? .All protested by the left.

You gotta love those in this country that use our safety and security as a punch line

Only China can bring the 14th century Islamic culture into the 21st century. If given the green light they can do it in six months.

Get your facts straight. There are no warships or carriers based in Bahrain. The U.S. Navy base is Naval Support Activity base…think of it as AAA for naval vessels.

You gotta love people who hang around to comment on blogs without actually reading the posts they don’t understand anyway.

It’s ground zero when it comes to monitoring the oil flow — nearly one gallon of every five used worldwide — down the gulf and through the narrow Strait of Hormuz.

The Navy is there to assure that we can keep burning a quarter of the world’s oil to fuel our SUVs and 4,000sq. ft. houses, not for our “safety and security”. The “conservative” addiction to outrageous profits for BP, Exxon-Mobile and Royal Dutch Shell has done more to harm US “safety and security” than anything since your last Tea Party.

Agreed.
.
It’s been used that way in a series of national elections in this country.
.
Anyone remember noun, verb, and 9/11?
.
“Cut and run”?

This is true, Libya has cleaner burning gas, and Venezuelan oil can only be processed in the US (which makes us pretty co-dependent despite the animosity between us and Chavez). However with respect to the larger picture, it is a fungible commodity.

Put another way…
.
“We fix ‘em over there so we don’t have to fix them here.”

“However with respect to the larger picture, it is a fungible commodity.”
.
That is a simplistic view which on leads to a simplistic view that you can solve it by just using alt fuels immediately. Or if we spend billions today tomorrwo it will be solved.

“The Navy is there to assure that we can keep burning a quarter of the world’s oil to fuel our SUVs and 4,000sq. ft. houses, not for our “safety and security”
.
We don’t – Don’t drive, don’t turn on lights don’t use heat or AC, don’t cook, turn off your PC. Or are you like Algore who froths over global warming but the state of TN’s lights dim over the amount of electricity Casa Gore uses not to mention carting his fat butt around in private jets.

“We fix ‘em over there so we don’t have to fix them here.
.
That seems to be an efficient and environmentally sound policy

I guess I just never realized this before but English isn’t your native language is it?

“I guess I just never realized”
.

What you don’t realize could fill 3 blogs. I understand English perfectly well it is the rantings of idiots I have difficulty understanding.

“…it is the rantings of idiots I have difficulty understanding.”
.
Well don’t feel to too bad, you parrot them almost perfectly.

“Well don’t feel to too bad, you parrot them almost perfectly”
>
I guess one can only hope to achieve your lofty heights in that skill.

No argument there.
.
Okinawa has one. They’re all over the place, so no ship has to go very far for a “flat repair and lube job”.

You shouldn’t set your ambitions too high. Who knows, you might form an original thought and lose all of your complex motor skills.

@jsfox

You are mistaken when you say that oil produced here goes onto the global market … at least mostly. Only oil from specific fields goes on that market. Think Alaska. That’s much it. Oil produced elsewhere in the U.S. isn’t economical to ship overseas, in part because, as a net oil importer, the U.S. is the more valuable market for that oil. There is a limited amount that goes to some Caribean nations, primarily because the U.S. hasn’t until recently been building refineries for decades. Thus some has to be exported to be refined. But, again, the costs are such that the oil thus exported is mostly returned here as refined products.

It is also useful to remember that oil is a very fungible product. Any barrel of oil is much like any other barrel of oil, so even the oil that is exported is being replaced from other sources, like Canada, Mexico and Venezuala, leading to a net wash on the exchange.

Drilling for oil here CAN and WOULD help with our balance of trade, and our dependence on foreign oil precisely because oil is so fungible. Apart from the transportation costs, there is little difference between oil and money, as far as markets are concerned. But, the best benefit from drilling here would accrue if we upgraded and expanded the refineries we have, and built a few more, too.

The long term problem with all fossil fuels is that is an inherently limited supply. While the historical fact is that the depletion of oil reserves has been repeatedly forecast for roughly 80 years, and the forecasts have proven wrong due to the discover of more reserves, that can’t continue. The question is when will new discoveries cease to support the market?

If we don’t plan as if that point is imminent, when it in fact becomes true, we could find ourselves in a whole world of hurt. Resorting to “renewables” isn’t necessarily a good idea. Once you have energy as a crop, a crop failure can leave you doubly screwed. You may not have the energy to meet the needs for fuels and food production, nor to transport the food you produce.

There is also an old saying that is little known outside certain limited circles: “The last nation with oil wins.” Oil is, at present, the most efficient means we have for transporting energy. It’s relatively compact and dense. Think about it. You can push a ton of metal fifty miles or more on 231 cubic inches of gasoline, and at good speeds. When you start looking at fuel efficiency and rail, the numbers are even more striking. Thus, one concept of global strategy is to let everyone else use up their oil first.

We also have substantial coal reserves, which we could get into discussing, but the energy market is, I think, much more complex than you appreciate, and of much more strategic relevance than others commenting here realize.

America has three real geopolitical interests: (1) make sure no hegemon arises to control all of Eurasia (since such a hegemon could over time destroy us), (2) control the seas, skies and space to protect the homeland and (3) control our borders and make certain the people in the border regions are loyal to the US not to their land of origin. None of these goals require us to pay hundreds of billions of dollars a year paying for the defense of Europe, Japan and Korea (who can afford their own defense). We should focus our money on developing our own country, on achieving energy independence and should pull back our military to our territory and to the defense of key areas we think necessary to defense of America. Our foreign policy should not be that of world policeman but rather should be like that of Britain for centuries basically controlling the seas, growing wealthy on trade and intervening with allies temporarily and as needed to prevent any Eurasian hegemon from arising. http://fms.nu/hV7MdN

It is very strange. The unrest in Bahrain is being fanned and fueled by Iran who wants to assume leadership position in the region. It was also a great admirer of Egyptian protesters but it has banned all protests within Iran. What was kosher for Egyptians is now forbidden for Iranians. Read more at: http://fmeducation.wordpress.com/2011/02/16/what-is-kosher-in-egypt-is-forbidden-for-iranians%E2%80%A6/