For some time now I have been sitting on a question that was raised by your Export Land model.  It is brought into sharp relief by your two market models above.

Model 1 describes a free market.  Model 2 describes a command economy.

The only way you can convince a company not to maximize its profits is to remove the profit motive by directing its operations to satisfy criteria besides profit.  Keeping oil at home to satisfy domestic needs will amount to accepting a lower price than might be available on the world market.  The only way I can see of doing this is by nationalizing the oil companies.

Am I missing something? Is there any other way to accomplish this short of outright nationalization?

Even if there is, I expect we will see a wave of nationalizations sweep the industry as the decline starts to bite.

Well we've already seen a trend of nationalization, e.g. in Russia and Venezuela and Bolivia, and now most of the world's oil and gas is only available via national oil companies.

I would add a third model to the #1 and #2 above, and this has an impact on the "export land" model.  The #2 above says "Available exports go to preferred buyers, not just to the highest bidder."  In the export lands model the domestic users are considered the "preferred buyers".  But the problem with this, and with many assumptions I've seen in discussions here about geopolitics, is that it is assumed that a "country" is a unified block acting as one individual, or family, or tribe, would.  In reality, TPTB in a given country may see their own interests as higher than that of "the peasants" within their borders, and may see certain other, nonlocal, world powers as the "preferred buyers".

Of course, keeping the peasants from turning to barricades and pitchforks is part of the calculations of TPTB, but only part, and they only need to dedicate part of the oil and gas towards that end.  Thus model #3 is that "preferred buyers" are chosen on a playing field that may ignore national boundaries.

That plan may or may not suceed.  E.g., in Nigeria TPTB rake in the billions while the peasants only get oil stains on their clothes (when they wash them in the river).  But this arrangement is getting more and more tenuous.  So the question is: who will win this game, fascism/organized crime or local popular pressure.

As for the USA, I think it is clear that TPTB care not for the locals.  Their plan, as brought into action over the last 20 years or so, was to move manufacturing elsewhere, eventually impoverishing the locals (once their purchasing power is no longer needed to keep the global rich getting richer).  Now, even our fertilizer is made overseas, where the natural gas is.

Quote: `Am I missing something? Is there any other way to accomplish this short of outright nationalization?'

The answer is an export duty. In Russia if you want to export a ton of crude oil you must pay $237.6 to the state budget (from December 1 it will be $180.7), thus the internal price is much lower. If the government want to increase internal supply it can raise a duty to the prohibitive level.

Duh.  Of course!  Thanks for that.