• Font Size:
  • Print

A potentially huge story from the New York Times.

NYT reports:

Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil exporter, is planning to increase its output next month by about a half-million barrels a day, according to analysts and oil traders who have been briefed by Saudi officials.

The increase could bring Saudi output to a production level of 10 million barrels a day, which, if sustained, would be the kingdom's highest ever. The move was seen as a sign that the Saudis are becoming increasingly nervous about both the political and economic effect of high oil prices. In recent weeks, soaring fuel costs have incited demonstrations and protests from Italy to Indonesia.

Saudi Arabia is currently pumping 9.45 million barrels a day, which is an increase of about 300,000 barrels from last month.

Data source: 2004 through March 2008: EIA; April-June: numbers discussed in NYT article.
saudi_jun_08.gif

The loss of 1 million barrels per day of Saudi production between 2005 and 2007 was one of the single most important factors in the run-up in world oil prices over the last several years. One theory of the cause behind the earlier drop was that the Saudis' magnificent Ghawar oil field had entered into decline, in response to which the Saudis made a big increase in drilling effort to develop alternative sources within the kingdom. The Wikipedia Oil Megaprojects database calculates 1 million barrels/day in eventual gross new capacity from Saudi projects scheduled to begin producing this year. The Calgary Herald yesterday reported:

Saudi Arabia will start pumping from its new 500,000 barrel-a-day Khursaniyah field within the next month, a board member of state oil company Saudi Aramco said.

An alternative explanation for the earlier Saudi production cutbacks, discussed in my recent paper on oil prices, is that the decline in the price-elasticity of petroleum demand in recent years could have made lower production levels in the Saudis' economic interest. I attributed the decline in the U.S. elasticity to the very low share to which energy expenditures had fallen relative to GDP by 1998, but noted that with the recent dramatic increase in prices, that share had risen substantially and we should expect to see a corresponding return in the elasticity to the higher levels seen historically. There is abundant evidence that U.S. consumers are now making significant responses to higher oil prices.

Whatever the explanation, if the Saudis do produce 10 million barrels a day next month, I would expect it to have a significant impact on near-term oil prices.

James Hamilton

About this author:
Become a Contributor Submit an Article

This article has 15 comments:

  •  
    Jun 16 03:58 AM
    Depends whether the added production is heavy sour. If so, there is still a significant shortfall in light crude to make deisel and a refinery shortage of all types, esp. in Europe.
  •  
    Jun 16 04:57 AM
    I agree, if the new oil is not light/sweet, then it won't add to global capacity, as other heavy sour producers like Iran are already starting to sit on their, having to pump up discounts to get of it at all. I can't find anything in the news on what type of oil it is, even though it has meanwhile seeped into common (informed) knowledge that the oil tightness is on the light sweet side, not in the overall market.
  •  
    Jun 16 07:02 AM
    I don't fully understand this Reuters story, but it's pertinent:
    Asian Refiners Say No Thanks to More Saudi Crude
    www.reuters.com/articl...
  •  
    Jun 16 07:28 AM
    Saudi s are pumping full blast.That realization alone will keep prices high.A few hundred k bpd. wont do to much to keep prices lower.
  •  
    Jun 16 08:31 AM
    Can the Kingdom increase production?
  •  
    Oil traders laugh when the Saudi's say they going to increase production. Boone Pickens says they can't. They are topped out. Right now oil is cheap, I will tell you why @
    theinvestingspeculator...
  •  
    Jun 16 10:35 AM
    Once again, it goes to show the Saudis have more sense than the U.S. Congress, but we knew that already.
  •  
    Jun 16 11:05 AM
    Spec,

    Thanks for the thoughtful post.

    Yes, Milton & Rose Friedman, Boone Pickens and Matt Simmons were (...and are) very prescient people. It's too bad Milton's not around right now to bring some sense to our current energy dilemma.

    Interestingly, though, our country still has quite alot of relatively inexpensive domestic oil and gas reserves. Like the Bakkens, Barnett, Marcellus, Haynesville, and the near-in Gulf Coast, where McMoran is making huge new finds at shallow depths.

    As you may know, I still believe our present energy shortfall is largely political in nature. A self-imposed Congressional boycott, if you will, contrived by the Greens, designed to wean us off "killer" oil (...if it doesn't break us first).

    Personally, I am both repulsed by this debate and the potential loss of freedom it entails. In this regard, I would refer you to the recent "Joe, American" post on You Tube. It is quite well done, and sums up my mood perfectly.

  •  
    Jun 16 11:53 AM
    Sadly Americans are more willing to ask terrorist dictators for more oil production than they are willing to ask Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Drilling is currently illegal on over 10,000 miles of US coastline.

    Russia produces more oil than Saudi Arabia so we should be asking the Russians for more oil production, not Saudi Arabia. And the reason why Russia produces more oil than any other country in the world is because geologists there understand that oil comes from the mantle and not biological organisms: oilismastery.blogspot..../
  •  
    Jun 16 12:35 PM
    Paul: thanks for the YouTube headsup. Here it is for those interested: www.youtube.com/watch?...
  •  
    Jun 16 04:05 PM
    The "Joe, American" talking head wasn't doing too badly, until he got to the part about getting the Iraqis to give us $2 trillion in oil discounts out to 2020 to make up for our costs of the war. By one reconing, that's about $3 million for each dead Iraqi . . . The folks who extracted reparations from Germany after WWI were pikers in comparison.
  •  
    Jun 16 10:38 PM
    Brian,

    I owed you one for turning me on to Thomas Gold and inorganic oil. Thanks again, and you're welcome.

    I liked Gold's examination of meteors as evidence that the composition of rocks in oil formations were everywhere on earth AND in the universe, but what really got me was his discussion of satellite pictures showing naturally occurring oil slicks on waters where NO fossils existed. The clincher was getting Hubbert himself to admit geologists weren't even trained to understand such phenomena one day over lunch.

    As for "Joe, American," that's EXACTLY the kind of positive PR we need to challenge the hammerlock the Greens now hold over the "Know Nothing" politicians in Washington. It almost brought a tear to my eye, it was so well done!

  •  
    Jun 17 02:42 AM
    Do we not get 60% of our oil from Mexico & Canada ?
  •  
    Jun 17 02:56 AM
    There is a huge difference between the statements: "Saudi Arabia will start pumping from its new 500,000 barrel-a-day Khursaniyah field within the next month..." and "...Saudis ... produce 10 million barrels a day next month".

    1. 500kbrl/day is the maximum field capacity. If they only start pumping from it next month there is no way they can bring the output to the maximum that same month if ever. They also need to fill up all pipes and storage volumes before they can really output all oil they pump.

    2. Many older fields there seam to be in terminal decline. By the time Khursaniyah starts flowing to export it will need to offset that decline as well. We do not know if it even will be able to do that. Even if it does the decline will go on, so this peak in production won't be sustainable.

    3. Even if they add 500kbarrels a day it will be still sort of those 10mbarrels a day.
  •  
    Jun 18 04:26 AM
    Reliant of India has committed to take 1/3 of the new output.

ETFs In Focus