Re: [biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
On Mon, 24 May 2004 04:17:30 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hoagy Anyone see this? No but thank you Keith and speaking of real men and what they have to say I thought this excerpt from the article pasted below would be of possible future interest -- Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry about rising gas prices, Prince Bandar assured the president. After screwing Americans all summer with high prices at the pump, Bandar promised Bush the Saudis would pump more oil in the fall, thereby lowering gas prices ö just before the election. We had something about it before, but it's certainly worth spelling it out again, thankyou. I just hope people will remember it when it happens. And the media... murdoch wrote: I haven't decided what I think of Woodward's claim, though one has to say that he has good credibility. My inclination when I heard this was that it was half true, and that even if fully true, that there are other factors at work here. It would seem so. 1. The Saudis and others have said, and I believe it also to be a factor, that the U.S. has for so long prevented expansion and new construction in the refinery industry that part of the reason the U.S. gas prices are going up has more to do with that, than with any shortage of oil. Since the refinery shortage argument seems to get short play (it is an argument for the enviro conspiracy driving up prices I guess rather than an argument for the Bush-Saudi price manipulation conspiracy) I thought I'd put it back on the table. It sounds as if we've been led to believe the US refinery industry has not expanded in the last 30 years but what about capacity? 2. I also tend to buy into the idea that if we are going into a world economic expansion in such areas as China, and if we have done little or nothing to dissaociate such a 21st century expansion with increased use of Oil, then, DUH, we are going to see use of oil go up and, probably, prices. If more cars and motorized bikes and what-not are being put into garages worldwide, and if they're being put there to get daily use, then of course, the cumulative net world-wide effect is an increased use of fuel. Perhaps a comparison of US China's petroleum demand to world production levels on a monthly/yearly basis would provide a interesting view. 3. Another factor, in my view, has been the Bush Administration's increase of the Debt and the possibility (probability, certainty, some would say) this will lead to paying it off in lower-valued American Dollars. Why should Oil Producers, from a profit-oriented point of view, not try to get the best-value for their product that they can get? Another comparison to US dollar value to crude prices would also be interesting although it wouldn't necessarily show the tax breaks for the rich or the huge indebtedness of the Bush-Cheney/Iraq-war deficits of the future would it? By the way thank you Keith for the article by: http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=523676 Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia So, there was perhaps some hush-hush we-can-help you conversation between Bush and the Saudis, and if it happened it was just another in a long line of sickeningly inappropriate machinations on the part of this Administration, but I don't see it as the only thing going on here. If anyone other then the Bush-Cheney Administration had said this it would probably sound conspiring but where they telling Bob Woodward the truth or...? I agree with Bush: Read Bob Woodward's book By Bill Press http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179 Posted: April 23, 2004 snip Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70 http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM ~- Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
On Mon, 24 May 2004 04:17:30 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hoagy Anyone see this? No but thank you Keith and speaking of real men and what they have to say I thought this excerpt from the article pasted below would be of possible future interest -- Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry about rising gas prices, Prince Bandar assured the president. After screwing Americans all summer with high prices at the pump, Bandar promised Bush the Saudis would pump more oil in the fall, thereby lowering gas prices ö just before the election. We had something about it before, but it's certainly worth spelling it out again, thankyou. I just hope people will remember it when it happens. And the media... I haven't decided what I think of Woodward's claim, though one has to say that he has good credibility. My inclination when I heard this was that it was half true, and that even if fully true, that there are other factors at work here. 1. The Saudis and others have said, and I believe it also to be a factor, that the U.S. has for so long prevented expansion and new construction in the refinery industry that part of the reason the U.S. gas prices are going up has more to do with that, than with any shortage of oil. Since the refinery shortage argument seems to get short play (it is an argument for the enviro conspiracy driving up prices I guess rather than an argument for the Bush-Saudi price manipulation conspiracy) I thought I'd put it back on the table. 2. I also tend to buy into the idea that if we are going into a world economic expansion in such areas as China, and if we have done little or nothing to dissaociate such a 21st century expansion with increased use of Oil, then, DUH, we are going to see use of oil go up and, probably, prices. If more cars and motorized bikes and what-not are being put into garages worldwide, and if they're being put there to get daily use, then of course, the cumulative net world-wide effect is an increased use of fuel. 3. Another factor, in my view, has been the Bush Administration's increase of the Debt and the possibility (probability, certainty, some would say) this will lead to paying it off in lower-valued American Dollars. Why should Oil Producers, from a profit-oriented point of view, not try to get the best-value for their product that they can get? So, there was perhaps some hush-hush we-can-help you conversation between Bush and the Saudis, and if it happened it was just another in a long line of sickeningly inappropriate machinations on the part of this Administration, but I don't see it as the only thing going on here. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
Anyone see this? No but thank you Keith and speaking of real men and what they have to say I thought this excerpt from the article pasted below would be of possible future interest -- Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry about rising gas prices, Prince Bandar assured the president. After screwing Americans all summer with high prices at the pump, Bandar promised Bush the Saudis would pump more oil in the fall, thereby lowering gas prices ö just before the election. There's also a piece by Anthony Sampson in the Independent, but only for subscribers (which I'm not): Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia -- The ultimate nightmare for Western consumers is to find that the biggest oil exporter does not need to export 22 May 2004 http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=2004 Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials Tim Kennedy, Arab News snip I agree with Bush: Read Bob Woodward's book By Bill Press http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179 Posted: April 23, 2004 © 2004 Tribune Media Services, Inc. It is strange enough that President Bush would recommend any book. After all, he admits he never even reads a newspaper, let alone tackles an entire book. It is even more strange he would recommend reading Bob Woodward's latest book, Plan of Attack, which hit bookstores this week. But there it is: No. 1 on the Suggested Reading List of the official Bush-Cheney 2004 website ö ahead of books by such adoring acolytes as Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin, Lynne Cheney and Sean Hannity. For once, I agree with President Bush. In fact, I second the motion. Read Bob Woodward's book. I already have. And if every American voter did, John Kerry would win by a landslide. This is no book by a disgruntled former employee. Bob Woodward is the most respected, and best connected, investigative reporter in the country. President Bush likes Woodward so much he gave him two, unprecedented, interviews, totaling three and half hours ö and instructed the rest of his team to do likewise. In Plan of Attack, you do not read how Woodward thinks the decision was made to invade Iraq. You read how George Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Andy Card, George Tenet, Gen. Tommy Franks and others told him decisions were made. And his tale is frightening. From Bob Woodward we learn, first of all, that Richard Clarke was right. Clarke was denounced by the White House for suggesting the Bush administration was asleep at the switch during the months leading up to Sept. 11. Yet Woodward confirms that, despite a warning to the president from CIA Director George Tenet naming al-Qaida as the most serious threat facing the United States, four meetings of agency deputies were held in the summer of 2001 with zero discussion of Osama bin Laden. Their entire focus, that early, was on Iraq. From Bob Woodward we learn that President Bush ordered planning for war in Iraq to begin as early as November 2001 ö even though he publicly denied it. On Dec. 28, 2001, for example, he received a briefing on Iraq war plans from Gen. Franks in Crawford, Texas. He walked out of the meeting and told reporters they discussed Afghanistan. From Bob Woodward we learn that both Bush and Cheney knowingly exaggerated the dangers posed by Iraq. Despite strong suspicions of illegal activity, the CIA admitted to the White House it had no concrete evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction or nuclear weapons, or had any connection to al-Qaida. Nevertheless, the president and vice-president went around the country, telling Americans just the opposite. From Bob Woodward we learn that President Bush decided to go to war while inspectors were still searching for WMD and while he was still pretending to work with the United Nations. He informed Saudi Arabia's Prince Bandar of his decision before telling Secretary of State Colin Powell. And, when he finally did meet with Powell, it was to tell him he was going to war, not to ask his advice. From Bob Woodward we learn that Bush paid for his secret war planning by diverting to Iraq $700 million from funds previously appropriated by Congress, following Sept. 11, for counterterrorism. And he did so without notifying members of Congress. Under the Constitution, Congress alone has the power of the purse. Bush's covert transfer of funds was dishonest, if not outright illegal. Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry
Re: [biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
I think that we might have reasons to take this from the Saudis with a big grain of salt. It is well known, that when BP started to analyze and report on the worlds oil reserves, the Saudis had much less than they reported. BP was told in clear language, that they should publish the official numbers that they gave, not any own analysis. I can see many reasons, why the Saudis now want to claim that they, on their own, have more than 60% of the worlds oil reserves. They can always come back later and say OOPS! it was a mistake and we have fired the guy. Especially when they now contracted NG and oil exploration with China and Russia. The Saudis have been caught with playing around with numbers before. It is also likely that this story is a hoax and that the Saudis are not involved at all, would not surprise me. Will be interesting to see, if the Saudis suddenly managed to find the largest oil discovery in the history of oil exploration and can in no time pick up all the production slack for the whole world. Hakan At 09:07 23/05/2004, you wrote: Anyone see this? No but thank you Keith and speaking of real men and what they have to say I thought this excerpt from the article pasted below would be of possible future interest -- Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry about rising gas prices, Prince Bandar assured the president. After screwing Americans all summer with high prices at the pump, Bandar promised Bush the Saudis would pump more oil in the fall, thereby lowering gas prices ö just before the election. There's also a piece by Anthony Sampson in the Independent, but only for subscribers (which I'm not): Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia -- The ultimate nightmare for Western consumers is to find that the biggest oil exporter does not need to export 22 May 2004 http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=2004http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=2004 Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials Tim Kennedy, Arab News snip I agree with Bush: Read Bob Woodward's book By Bill Press http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179 Posted: April 23, 2004 © 2004 Tribune Media Services, Inc. It is strange enough that President Bush would recommend any book. After all, he admits he never even reads a newspaper, let alone tackles an entire book. It is even more strange he would recommend reading Bob Woodward's latest book, Plan of Attack, which hit bookstores this week. But there it is: No. 1 on the Suggested Reading List of the official Bush-Cheney 2004 website ö ahead of books by such adoring acolytes as Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin, Lynne Cheney and Sean Hannity. For once, I agree with President Bush. In fact, I second the motion. Read Bob Woodward's book. I already have. And if every American voter did, John Kerry would win by a landslide. This is no book by a disgruntled former employee. Bob Woodward is the most respected, and best connected, investigative reporter in the country. President Bush likes Woodward so much he gave him two, unprecedented, interviews, totaling three and half hours ö and instructed the rest of his team to do likewise. In Plan of Attack, you do not read how Woodward thinks the decision was made to invade Iraq. You read how George Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Andy Card, George Tenet, Gen. Tommy Franks and others told him decisions were made. And his tale is frightening. From Bob Woodward we learn, first of all, that Richard Clarke was right. Clarke was denounced by the White House for suggesting the Bush administration was asleep at the switch during the months leading up to Sept. 11. Yet Woodward confirms that, despite a warning to the president from CIA Director George Tenet naming al-Qaida as the most serious threat facing the United States, four meetings of agency deputies were held in the summer of 2001 with zero discussion of Osama bin Laden. Their entire focus, that early, was on Iraq. From Bob Woodward we learn that President Bush ordered planning for war in Iraq to begin as early as November 2001 ö even though he publicly denied it. On Dec. 28, 2001, for example, he received a briefing on Iraq war plans from Gen. Franks in Crawford, Texas. He walked out of the meeting and told reporters they discussed Afghanistan. From Bob Woodward we learn that both Bush and Cheney knowingly exaggerated the dangers posed by Iraq. Despite strong suspicions of illegal activity, the CIA admitted to the White House it had no concrete evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction or nuclear weapons,
hakan: Re: [biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Funny, if you look at the first page of Arabnews on the 29th of April, it is no links to this article, but if you do a search on 29 April it turns up. Such an important news article, would have been first side stuff in all the worlds papers and I for one would not have missed it. H? Hakan At 10:43 23/05/2004, you wrote: I think that we might have reasons to take this from the Saudis with a big grain of salt. It is well known, that when BP started to analyze and report on the worlds oil reserves, the Saudis had much less than they reported. BP was told in clear language, that they should publish the official numbers that they gave, not any own analysis. I can see many reasons, why the Saudis now want to claim that they, on their own, have more than 60% of the worlds oil reserves. They can always come back later and say OOPS! it was a mistake and we have fired the guy. Especially when they now contracted NG and oil exploration with China and Russia. The Saudis have been caught with playing around with numbers before. It is also likely that this story is a hoax and that the Saudis are not involved at all, would not surprise me. Will be interesting to see, if the Saudis suddenly managed to find the largest oil discovery in the history of oil exploration and can in no time pick up all the production slack for the whole world. Hakan At 09:07 23/05/2004, you wrote: Anyone see this? No but thank you Keith and speaking of real men and what they have to say I thought this excerpt from the article pasted below would be of possible future interest -- Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry about rising gas prices, Prince Bandar assured the president. After screwing Americans all summer with high prices at the pump, Bandar promised Bush the Saudis would pump more oil in the fall, thereby lowering gas prices ö just before the election. There's also a piece by Anthony Sampson in the Independent, but only for subscribers (which I'm not): Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia -- The ultimate nightmare for Western consumers is to find that the biggest oil exporter does not need to export 22 May 2004 http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=2004http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=2004http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=2004 Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials Tim Kennedy, Arab News snip I agree with Bush: Read Bob Woodward's book By Bill Press http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179http://world netdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179 Posted: April 23, 2004 © 2004 Tribune Media Services, Inc. It is strange enough that President Bush would recommend any book. After all, he admits he never even reads a newspaper, let alone tackles an entire book. It is even more strange he would recommend reading Bob Woodward's latest book, Plan of Attack, which hit bookstores this week. But there it is: No. 1 on the Suggested Reading List of the official Bush-Cheney 2004 website ö ahead of books by such adoring acolytes as Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin, Lynne Cheney and Sean Hannity. For once, I agree with President Bush. In fact, I second the motion. Read Bob Woodward's book. I already have. And if every American voter did, John Kerry would win by a landslide. This is no book by a disgruntled former employee. Bob Woodward is the most respected, and best connected, investigative reporter in the country. President Bush likes Woodward so much he gave him two, unprecedented, interviews, totaling three and half hours ö and instructed the rest of his team to do likewise. In Plan of Attack, you do not read how Woodward thinks the decision was made to invade Iraq. You read how George Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Andy Card, George Tenet, Gen. Tommy Franks and others told him decisions were made. And his tale is frightening. From Bob Woodward we learn, first of all, that Richard Clarke was right. Clarke was denounced by the White House for suggesting the Bush administration was asleep at the switch during the months leading up to Sept. 11. Yet Woodward confirms that, despite a warning to the president from CIA Director George Tenet naming al-Qaida as the most serious threat facing the United States, four meetings of agency deputies were held in the summer of 2001 with zero discussion of Osama bin Laden. Their entire focus, that early, was on Iraq. From Bob Woodward we learn
Re: [biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
Hi Hoagy Anyone see this? No but thank you Keith and speaking of real men and what they have to say I thought this excerpt from the article pasted below would be of possible future interest -- Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry about rising gas prices, Prince Bandar assured the president. After screwing Americans all summer with high prices at the pump, Bandar promised Bush the Saudis would pump more oil in the fall, thereby lowering gas prices ö just before the election. We had something about it before, but it's certainly worth spelling it out again, thankyou. I just hope people will remember it when it happens. And the media... There's also a piece by Anthony Sampson in the Independent, but only for subscribers (which I'm not): Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia -- The ultimate nightmare for Western consumers is to find that the biggest oil exporter does not need to export 22 May 2004 I found this piece by Anthony Sampson, a different view: http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=523676 Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia The ultimate nightmare for Western consumers is to find that the biggest oil exporter does not need to export 22 May 2004 It is only when the British public have to pay more for their petrol at the pumps that they take much interest in where it comes from. And today, they are right to link the price of petrol to the war in Iraq. But motorists too readily vent their anger on the companies whose name they see on the signs, particularly the two British companies, BP and Shell, which have always been convenient scapegoats. It is tempting to blame the oil companies for the shortage of oil, and to depict the war in Iraq as a straightforward attempt to control its oil reserves in the interests of the big corporations. But the remarkable fact is that Tony Blair, though he talked much about British interests, prepared for war without consulting the companies that had the greatest interests in, and experts on, Middle East oil. And, in fact, both Sir Philip Watts of Shell and Lord Browne of BP were warning that war in Iraq was likely to destabilise supplies and antagonise other Islamic oil-producers. It might seem surprising, but it has happened before. When Sir Anthony Eden launched the Suez War in 1956, also claiming to defend British interests, he did not consult Shell or BP, which had the most to lose. Both companies were deeply worried that such a dangerous adventure would antagonise Arab oil-producers through the Middle East - which it did, damaging British relations for years to come. The truth is that governments that are bent on military adventures - contrary to most conspiracy theories - become curiously resistant to advice from commercial concerns, which often understand much more about the consequences. Before the Iraq war, the neo-conservatives in Washington had their own view of the importance of oil: they saw Saddam Hussein as a huge obstacle to American power, who was sitting on top of 10 per cent of the world's oil supplies, as the Vice-President Dick Cheney explained. They saw Iraq as a huge gas-station, which could be liberated to reduce American dependence on the other gas-station, Saudi Arabia. And they wanted to break the power of Opec, the Arab-dominated oil cartel, and ensure cheap oil for American consumers. But they wanted to go to war with Iraq primarily for quite other reasons - to revenge the humiliation of 11 September, and to assert American influence and military supremacy in the Middle East. And their policy amounted to a reversal of the oil companies' policies over the previous decades, which had depended on co-operating with Islamic countries - which had most of the world's oil supplies under their ground. It is important to look back on this fundamental reversal, which may prove to be the most serious blunder behind the war. For a continuing high oil price could do more economic damage to the West than any terrorism so far. In the post-war decades, oil had been the most potent element in creating nationalism in Islamic countries. The awareness that Western companies were exploiting their oil-wealth provoked the successive popular revolutions against pro-Western regimes, including Iran in 1951 and Iraq in 1958, and the formation of Opec in 1960; and the nationalist regimes gradually compelled firms to share their profits and control. It was the growth of Arab nationalism, together with anger against Israel, that finally enabled the oil powers to create their own cartel in 1973, which quadrupled the oil price and set back Western economic growth for
Re: [biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
Hi Hakan --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Funny, if you look at the first page of Arabnews on the 29th of April, it is no links to this article, but if you do a search on 29 April it turns up. Such an important news article, would have been first side stuff in all the worlds papers and I for one would not have missed it. H? One should read all news stories as you're reading this one. I might have missed it, and I haven'the done a thorough check. But I'll take your word for it. Anyway, Hakan, such a resounding silence is kind of enigmatic, I don't think it would necessarily mean it's a hoax or a ploy of some kind. That might be as big as or bigger news than the story itself. It's a bit much to believe that the specialists on the big daily newspapers wouldn't have seen this story. And yet they ignore it? Surely that the guy said it, true or not, is worth a ton of analysis? - what are the implications? But silence, very strange. But it's a hall of mirrors at the best of times, as we know, and especially now. I did find some more, a transcript and another bit, but no news coverage. I'll post it next message. Regards Keith Hakan At 10:43 23/05/2004, you wrote: I think that we might have reasons to take this from the Saudis with a big grain of salt. It is well known, that when BP started to analyze and report on the worlds oil reserves, the Saudis had much less than they reported. BP was told in clear language, that they should publish the official numbers that they gave, not any own analysis. I can see many reasons, why the Saudis now want to claim that they, on their own, have more than 60% of the worlds oil reserves. They can always come back later and say OOPS! it was a mistake and we have fired the guy. Especially when they now contracted NG and oil exploration with China and Russia. The Saudis have been caught with playing around with numbers before. It is also likely that this story is a hoax and that the Saudis are not involved at all, would not surprise me. Will be interesting to see, if the Saudis suddenly managed to find the largest oil discovery in the history of oil exploration and can in no time pick up all the production slack for the whole world. Hakan At 09:07 23/05/2004, you wrote: Anyone see this? No but thank you Keith and speaking of real men and what they have to say I thought this excerpt from the article pasted below would be of possible future interest -- Finally, we learn from Bob Woodward that, as a reward for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Bush received what amounts to an in-kind campaign contribution from the Saudi royal family. Don't worry about rising gas prices, Prince Bandar assured the president. After screwing Americans all summer with high prices at the pump, Bandar promised Bush the Saudis would pump more oil in the fall, thereby lowering gas prices ö just before the election. There's also a piece by Anthony Sampson in the Independent, but only for subscribers (which I'm not): Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia -- The ultimate nightmare for Western consumers is to find that the biggest oil exporter does not need to export 22 May 2004 http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=20 04http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y= 2004 Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials Tim Kennedy, Arab News snip I agree with Bush: Read Bob Woodward's book By Bill Press http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179http:// worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38179 Posted: April 23, 2004 © 2004 Tribune Media Services, Inc. It is strange enough that President Bush would recommend any book. After all, he admits he never even reads a newspaper, let alone tackles an entire book. It is even more strange he would recommend reading Bob Woodward's latest book, Plan of Attack, which hit bookstores this week. But there it is: No. 1 on the Suggested Reading List of the official Bush-Cheney 2004 website ö ahead of books by such adoring acolytes as Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin, Lynne Cheney and Sean Hannity. For once, I agree with President Bush. In fact, I second the motion. Read Bob Woodward's book. I already have. And if every American voter did, John Kerry would win by a landslide. This is no book by a disgruntled former employee. Bob Woodward is the most respected, and best connected, investigative reporter in the country. President Bush likes Woodward so much he gave him two, unprecedented, interviews, totaling three and half hours ö and instructed the rest of his team to do likewise. In Plan of Attack, you do not read how Woodward thinks the decision was made to invade Iraq. You read how George Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin
[biofuel] Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
Anyone see this? There's also a piece by Anthony Sampson in the Independent, but only for subscribers (which I'm not): Anthony Sampson: The war in Iraq is distracting the West from the looming crisis in Saudi Arabia -- The ultimate nightmare for Western consumers is to find that the biggest oil exporter does not need to export 22 May 2004 http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6section=0article=44011d=29m=4y=2004 Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials Tim Kennedy, Arab News US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan addresses a conference on US-Saudi energy relations in Washington on Wednesday. WASHINGTON, 29 April 2004 - Officials from Saudi Arabia's oil industry and the international petroleum organizations shocked a gathering of foreign policy experts in Washington yesterday with an announcement that the Kingdom's previous estimate of 261 billion barrels of recoverable petroleum has now more than tripled, to 1.2 trillion barrels. Additionally, Saudi Arabia's key oil and finance ministers assured the audience - which included US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan - that the Kingdom has the capability to quickly double its oil output and sustain such a production surge for as long as 50 years. During times of turmoil, when the world has needed more crude oil, Saudi Arabia has worked without fanfare to promote stability in world markets, Saudi Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Ali Al-Naimi told the 300 attendees at a conference on US-Saudi energy relations co-sponsored by the US-Saudi Arabian Business Council and the Center for Strategic and International Studies. We have made a commitment to use our spare oil export capacity - even when it is stressful to our economic stability - in order to create a 'cushion' that maintains a balance in the global market, he said. Saudi Arabia now has 1.2 trillion barrels of estimated reserve. This estimate is very conservative. Our analysis gives us reason to be very optimistic. We are continuing to discover new resources, and we are using new technologies to extract even more oil from existing reserves, the minister said. Naimi said Saudi Arabia is committed to sustaining the average price of $25 per barrel set by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. He said prices should never increase to more than $28 or drop under $22. This is a fair price to consumers and producers. But, really, Saudi Arabia and OPEC has limited control on world markets, said Al-Naimi. Prices are driven by other factors: Instability in key oil producing countries; industry struggles to produce specialized gasoline; and the resulting strains on refineries to meet local demand. Saudi Arabia's vast oil reserves are certainly there, Naimi added. None of these reserves requires advanced recovery techniques. We have more than sufficient reserves to increase output. If required, we can increase output from 10.5 million barrels a day to 12-15 million barrels a day. And we can sustain this increased output for 50 years or more. There will be no shortage of oil for the next 50 years. Perhaps much longer. Greenspan said he found Naimi's news most interesting, but during his luncheon speech the Fed chairman cautioned that in order for the United States to sustain economic growth it must increase importation of natural gas products as a hedge against rising energy prices. (We need a) massive expansion of liquefied natural gas shipping terminals and (must) develop new offshore re-gasification technologies, said Greenspan, who also warned that the economic growth of China is driving up the global demand - and cost - for steel, coal, oil, and natural gas. Naimi said Saudi Arabia is acutely aware of the rising demands from China's booming economy. People are underestimating Chinese demand for natural gas imports, he said. But we are ready to meet their demands but not at the expense of Saudi Arabia's oil markets, particularly the US and Europe. Naimi said internal security is an additional concern to Saudi Arabia, which - according to Abdallah S. Jumah, president of Saudi Aramco - has required the Kingdom's largest oil company to hire 5,000 people to protect its fields, pipelines and terminals. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-- Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70 http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM -~- Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is
