<Let's Discuss: H.R. 6107, the American Energy Independence and Price Reduction ActThe Oil DrumPortugal getting a hand on Venezuela's energy riches>
<DrumBeat: May 22, 2008DrumBeatDrumBeat: May 24, 2008>

365 comments on DrumBeat: May 23, 2008

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

FTX on May 23, 2008 - 11:42am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Mexico Pemex Jan-Apr Crude Output 2.88M B/D, Down 9% On Year (probably paywalled)

MEXICO CITY (Dow Jones)--Mexican crude oil production and exports fell sharply during the first four months of 2008 as output the country's main oil field recedes, reported Petroleos Mexicanos on Friday.

Total oil production slid 9% to 2.88 million barrels a day compared with the year-ago period, while exports plummeted 13% to 1.48 million barrels a day. Waning output in major non-OPEC exporting countries Mexico and Russia has contributed to a meteoric rise in crude oil prices this year to more than $130 a barrel.

Pemex said that Cantarell, the country's main oil field that has been in decline since 2004, saw output fall by 416,000 barrels a day in the first four months of 2008, compared with the year-ago period. Pemex has been unable to bring enough output on line at other oil fields to compensate for Cantarell.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
FTX on May 23, 2008 - 11:49am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

April Pemex production release is here (PDF)

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Darwinian on May 23, 2008 - 12:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Mexico production and export numbers.

C+C production down 80,000 barrels per day, March to April.
All Liquids down 78,000 barrels per day, March to April.
Exports down 189,000 barrels per day, March to April.
Exports down 240,000 barrels per day, April 2007 verses April 2008.

Ron Patterson

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
FTX on May 23, 2008 - 5:24pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

More from Dow Jones Newswires (may be paywalled)

MEXICO CITY (Dow Jones)--Mexico's 2008 oil production target of 3 million barrels a day looks like a fairy tale as output slid for the third straight month in April to a nine-year low.
...
One Pemex executive, speaking to Dow Jones Newswires on condition of anonymity, admitted the target is unrealistic considering low production during the first quarter.

The statistics are ugly. The last time Mexican output surpassed 3 million barrels a day was September. Furthermore, Mexico's most difficult months are in the third and fourth quarters when the hurricane season regularly forces the company to shut in oil fields in the Campeche Sound, which pumps around 80% of the country's oil.

Weather forecasters are predicting an active hurricane season this year.

Some relief is coming. Pemex officials expect marine production to increase in May and June. Carlos Morales Gil, Pemex's exploration and production chief, has said the company repaired an 80,000 barrel-a-day marine pipeline in May in the Southeast marine region. In that area, production slipped by an average of 52,066 barrels a day in April versus March.
...
Pemex hoped to see Cantarell average 1.3 million barrels a day this year, but has been unable to halt the decline. Since January, Cantarell production has slid by 159,000 barrels a day to the lowest levels seen since 1996.

Pemex officials admit that Cantarell has declined to the point where some former oil wells are now producing natural gas because the oil layer of the reservoir is much narrower. The additional gas will be injected into other parts of the reservoir to help maintain underground pressure.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
karlof1 on May 23, 2008 - 11:57am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Analysis of Mexico's Battle Over Oil

The campaign to privatize Pemex builds on fear and exaggerated claims of the perils of not doing what the president wants. A recent report from the refineries division lays out a scathing critique: "The refining industry is in a crisis situation that negatively affects its ability to comply with its objectives of efficiency and profitability in supplying domestic demand for petroleum products. This also keeps it from taking advantage of favorable conditions in the world market ..."

Mexico's Joe Sixpacks and their wives are preparing to fight to retain their resources from looting by neoliberal interests led by the US Empire.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
super390 on May 23, 2008 - 1:22pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Even if there isn't a neocon conspiracy against Mexico and its oil, the people of Mexico should act as though there is one based on their past history with the US and the current disaster perpetrated by the US on Iraq. The burden of proof is on us to show that we have something to offer most Mexicans besides sweatshops.

Yet nowhere in any major American media is there any discussion of the idea that the United States must justify its demands to the rest of the world based on rational self-interest. There are occasional reports of the negative effects of the World Bank/IMF cabal on various countries (the list is endless), and less often reports on the negative effects of NAFTA on Mexico. What we are not allowed to do is put these stories together the way that people overseas increasingly do:

What's good for America is bad for everyone else.

What's good for everyone else is bad for America.

These ideas are so alien to our eyes that we make no demand to our leaders that they articulate an alternative. Even the most liberal Presidential candidate who is electable must phrase the problem in terms of misunderstanding on the part of the foreigners.

The most absurd and dangerous form this has taken is when democratic governments like Turkey have given into the popular will and refused to aid the US invasion of Iraq, while other democratic governments like Denmark defied the popular will by joining Bush's crusade. Bush's propaganda ministry (state & corporate wings) invariably talked of the defiant actions as coming from the "government", while the compliant actions were by the "nation" or "people". In other words, only evil big government says no to America. The people everywhere are always on our side, only muzzled by socialist tyranny. We've been living under this formula for generations, and we've used it to ruin Vietnam and Iraq to the tune of millions dead.

So now if Mexicans line up against US oil companies, will we pretend again that the majority are just brainless (and thus cartoon-killable) clones of renascent Communism, and the corrupt business minority are somehow "the people of Mexico"? Because we are known to go war to save the people from Communism.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
eric blair on May 23, 2008 - 1:37pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Even if there isn't a neocon conspiracy against Mexico and its oil, the people of Mexico should act as though there is one based on their past history with the US and the current disaster perpetrated by the US on Iraq.

If the 'mexicans suk - stop 'em from coming in' crowd is right, there is evidence that citizens are being told exactly that by some elements.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
karlof1 on May 23, 2008 - 2:26pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

To the article on Pemex should be added the discussion of Bush's plans for Iraq's oil as shown by Schwartz, which displays a continuum in the Empire's overall strategy.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
InJapan on May 23, 2008 - 7:43pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

What an incredibly biased article by the author Laura Carlsen. As far as PO though, she doesn't seem to appreciate the need to lessen the slope on the downside of oil production.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
westexas on May 23, 2008 - 11:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Like the ELM, the UK and Indonesia, Mexico was consuming about half of their production at peak, so they are in the "red zone," unlikely to be a net exporter beyond 2014, and their year over year change in net oil exports should look something like the ELM, UK and Indonesia net export year over year changes:

As I have noted on the other threads, it appears that all three of our closest sources of exported oil--Canada (slight decline), Venezuela and Mexico--showed net export declines in 2007.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dragonfly41 on May 23, 2008 - 3:24pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hey WT, oil is fungible, right? Proximity doesn't matter, right? I am joking of course. I do not see oil as fungible, especially when national protection of natural resources kicks into high gear in the not too distant future.

Once the sides are drawn up over the last of the Petro Battles, proximity to the resource will be key to survival.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
calgarydude on May 23, 2008 - 3:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Exactly. That's why I moved to Calgary.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
earlyAdaptor on May 23, 2008 - 4:04pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Actually, lack of proximity to the resource is key to survival when it comes to a shootout at the Last Gas Pump. I certainly would prefer to be somewhere else, living a low profile life without much need for the resource in question, when they start applying violence to the problem of who gets the last drop.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
totoneila on May 23, 2008 - 4:18pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Good point--real damn difficult to determine that geo-located 'sweetspot' where you can still get access to vital resources by foot, riding animal, or bicycle, but still far enough away where you hope your Eco-Tech Bunkers isn't decimated.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
eric blair on May 23, 2008 - 6:48pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

*clap* *clap*

Add to that the ability to 'reach out' and 'touch someone' from a long way away via deer hunting rifles/.50 cal FMJ - kinda hard for the isolated to make it if things get shooting bad.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
slinky on May 23, 2008 - 8:27pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hi early,

I agree, probly best to "make other arangements" as JHK says. Get used to doing without ff, or very little. New ways of living are on the horizon, hell, they're just around the corner. Got to get it out of our brains, this "life via oil". It's over. That doesn't mean life is over, just our modus operendi. Good call.

Jeff

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
WNC Observer on May 24, 2008 - 7:18am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Yes, don't wait until you absolutely HAVE to do without to start doing without. Get ahead of the curve and start learning how to do without now, so you have time to practice and make non-fatal, correctable mistakes.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dragonfly41 on May 24, 2008 - 8:43am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

When I said "proximity to the resource will be key to survival" I was referring to a particular country not an individual.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
martinw on May 23, 2008 - 11:36pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

And the actual numbers for Cantarell in April are here:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=auA2G9v81BqM&refer=n...

Output at Cantarell, Pemex's biggest field, fell 33 percent to 1.07 million barrels a day, according to the Energy Ministry. That was the lowest output since March 1996 at the field, which peaked at 2.192 million barrels a day in December 2003

Last month was 1.17 million, so this is the first month where it is below half the peak production rate. And it looks like it won't be long at all before the world loses one of its 1mbpd fields.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.