*How Important is Saudi Oil?*


*by Sarah YizraeliMiddle East Quarterly**March 2000**, pp. 57-64*

*http://www.meforum.org/42/how-important-is-saudi-oil
<http://www.meforum.org/42/how-important-is-saudi-oil>*Twice, in 1979-81
and in 1985-86, Saudi Arabia was the oil-producing country that pursued an
active, even aggressive, policy designed to shape the global oil market. In
the first round, oil prices went up three-fold, though not further, thanks
to Saudi efforts. In the second instance, to recapture lost market share,
Riyadh instigated a price war that resulted in a severe drop in prices.
Saudi Arabia could fill this role because of its unrivaled position in the
world oil market, one that resulted from a combination of factors: huge
production capabilities, a moderate pricing policy, the size of its
reserves, and its relations with the West. Could there be a third time? In
other words, could Saudi Arabia again shape the oil market in a way that
would have a pronounced effect on the world economy, or does that belong to
the ever-more distant past?

The reply is determined primarily by two factors: the role of oil in the
world economy and the role of Saudi Arabia in the oil market. It is the
Saudi misfortune that both are declining. In the next decade it appears
that the unique role of Saudi oil will be confined to maintaining a surplus
that covers possible temporary shortages. Important as this is, from a
Western point of view, it means that concerns about Saudi security will be
less acute.

*I. Oil in the World Economy*

After the oil crises of 1973-74 and 1979-80, consumers were intent not to
undergo a third time of troubles. This led to two major developments, both
of which implied a significant drop in oil consumption: finding ways to
conserve energy and developing a range of alternate energy sources (such as
coal, natural gas, and nuclear power).

Until the energy crisis of the 1970s, world oil consumption had risen at a
brisk pace. Indeed, demand continued to rise for several years after the
initial 1973-74 price rise, as economies took time to adjust. In 1970, the
world's crude oil production amounted to 47 million barrels per day1 (b/d);
it grew quickly to 60 million b/d in 1980,2 despite a weak world economy.
Over the next two decades oil demand growth slowed sharply, such that in
1998 world demand for oil reached approximately 72 million b/d.3 (See table
1, page XX.) In other words, oil use rose more during the stagnant economy
of the 1970s (13 million b/d) than during the vibrant growth of 1980-1998
(12 million b/d).

Furthermore, whereas most of the demand growth through the 1970s came from
the Western industrial countries (North America, Western Europe, and
Japan), oil demand in those countries barely rose after 1980; note that oil
demand in the former Soviet Union fell 4 million b/d in 1980-98, The vast
majority of the demand growth – 9 million b/d – came from Asia outside of
Japan. Due to more efficient technologies and the growth of industries that
use little oil (like computers), Western industrial economies are no longer
sucking up more oil as they grow. The shift to non-oil energy sources has
been especially consequential in the slow growth of oil demand. Oil
accounted for 49 percent of the West's total consumption of primary energy
in 1972 but just around 40 percent in 1990. These trends are expected to
continue over the next two decades. According to the U.S. Department of
Energy, oil will constitute 38 percent of total energy consumption in 2000
and 37 percent in 2020. The most rapidly growing source of energy is
expected to be natural gas, which will increase its share from 23 percent
of the primary energy consumed in 1990 to 27 percent by 2020.4

The pace of substitution with alternative energy sources may accelerate in
coming years, especially if non-oil fuels become more widely used for
transportation - a sector which today relies almost exclusively on oil. New
technologies for converting natural gas to liquid gasoline, or methane to
synthetic crude, are already under development.5 These technologies might
diminish OECD use of oil for transportation from the approximate average of
7 million b/d during the 1970s and 1980s to 5.5-6.5 million b/d by 2010.6
To be sure, economic development and increased urbanization in other parts
of the globe may mitigate this trend, balancing out most of the projected
decline in oil-fueled transportation.

However, a note of caution about oil projections is in order. Forecasts of
oil demand and of prices tend to be based on a linear extrapolations of
current trends. Assessments invariably reflect the situation when they are
made more than the date they intended to describe. Zaki al-Yamani, the
long-time Saudi petroleum minister (1962-86), once captured this deficiency
as follows: "When there's a surplus in the market, you tend to see the
future in that light. When there's a shortage, it's difficult to talk about
a surplus in the future without facing a barrage of disbelief."7 Interest
groups such as some Western politicians, industrialists and some oil
companies that had a stake in developing oil fields in the western
hemisphere, skillfully manipulated this impulse in the wake of oil crises
in 1973-74 and 1979-80 to spread fears of another oil crisis.

That said, the best guess at the moment is that the decline in oil's share
of world energy use and the discovery of new oil fields around the world
reduces the ability of oil producers such as Saudi Arabia to affect oil
prices. Consumers can shift from oil to other energy sources or they can
switch to deliveries from other oil fields. Oil's declining share, combined
with energy's declining importance in the world economy, diminishes the
economic impact that oil producers have on the economy.

*II. Saudi Arabia in the Oil Market*

*Increasing non-Saudi oil supplies*. The Persian Gulf's share of world oil
production has gone down and up dramatically over the past two decades.
Production in 1976 came to 37 percent of the world total and by 1985 was
estimated at just 17 percent of world output. This trend then reversed
itself, though not to the point of returning to the mid-1970 levels; in
1996 the Persian Gulf produced 27 percent of world oil. Saudi Arabia's
standing in the oil market has been even more volatile, going from 15
percent of world output in 1976, to 16 percent in 1980, 6 percent in 1985,
and 13 percent in 1996.8 The relative decrease in Western consumption had a
particularly negative impact on Persian Gulf oil exporters. OECD countries
imported 27 million b/d in 1973 but only 21 million b/d in 1997, of which
about one-third imported from the Persian Gulf. 9

The Saudi share of the world oil market is under challenge from several
sources, and especially from the Latin American and West African producers,
from the untapped oil fields in Iraq, and from the reservoir of the Caspian
Sea. While none of these new oil-producing areas alone can match Saudi
reserves and production, together they will undoubtedly erode Saudi
competitive advantage during the next decade. Longer term, they – and
especially Iraq – might emerge as competing hubs to Saudi Arabia. In 1976,
Latin America, Western Europe, and Asia combined produced a mere 16 percent
of global oil; in 1996, they produced 33 percent of world oil. Conversely,
as noted above, the same twenty-year period saw the Persian Gulf production
decline from 37 percent to 27 percent in 1996.10 The new crude sources also
has a major impact on global trade patterns; Europe and North America
increasingly relied on the North Sea and the Americas while Asian countries
increase their dependency on the Gulf's oil.

Efforts to reduce dependency on Gulf oil will persist at least over the
next decade as investments in energy flow to develop new oil fields and to
alternative energy sources. The volume of investment will depend on
economic feasibility, which is ultimately contingent on crude price levels.
Should prices fall below $10 per barrel (the current international average
price of finding and developing a new barrel of oil), investments will
subside, helping Gulf oil. If prices rise above $10 per barrel, the
profitability of investing in new sources is assured.

*Caspian oil*. Caspian Sea reserves deserve special note. Once estimated to
be in the range of 100 to 200 billion barrels,11 these numbers have dropped
dramatically, with the usual figure from optimists being now 30-60 billion
barrels; pessimists speak of only 20-30 billion. (By way of contrast, Saudi
Arabia's proven reserves are 265 billion barrels, and unproven reserves are
many billions more.) Recent estimates of Caspian production are also far
more modest than earlier ones. In 1998, Alexander Blokhin, the Russian
ambassador to Azerbaijan, estimated that in the year 2015 the Caspian Sea
repository will generate between 2 million b/d and 4 million b/d, or 3.5
percent to 7 percent of world production (as compared with a production
capacity of 36 percent in the Persian Gulf). Other estimates expect 2
million b/d in 2005 and 4 million in 2010.12

Even these numbers are a matter of conjecture, for the logistical
challenges to get Caspian oil to market are so high. Pipelines to transport
it already exist in Iran and Russia but the U.S. government wishes to avoid
both of those countries so that their governments do not get a stranglehold
on the Caspian oil, preferring instead to lay new pipelines through
Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey (to the west) or a second network through
Afghanistan (to the east). China signed an agreement with Kazakstan in 1997
for the construction of a 2,000-mile pipeline linking Kazakstan with
western China. Western specialists are dubious about the economic
feasibility of such a pipeline, but China seeks to ensure a long-term oil
supply, and Kazakhstan wants to reduce its dependence on Russia to convey
oil.

More broadly, Washington views the Caspian Sea independent of the Persian
Gulf, just as do some other Western governments, and to a lesser extent,
the Saudis, and other pro-Western Gulf producers. This thinking conforms to
a desire to prevent the creation of an oil producers' bloc (based on the
geographical proximity between the Gulf and the Caspian regions) that might
play as a pressure group controlled by unfriendly states such as Iran. In
contrast and for the same reasons as well as economic considerations,
Iranian thinking, echoed in some Western and Asian circles, views the
Caspian repository as the northern part of the Gulf reservoir. From a
logistic standpoint, the rationale behind this thinking is the desire to
channel the flow of Caspian oil through existing Iranian pipelines, hence
reducing its cost.

*Technology*. Technology also diminishes Saudi centrality. New technologies
facilitate oil detection and drilling, reduce production costs, and so
erode the price advantage previously held by the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries (OPEC) and Persian Gulf producers in general, Saudi
Arabia in particular.13 These technologies also enable the exploitation of
areas formerly off-limits for reasons of remoteness and economic
unfeasibility.

*Special political relationships*. Saudi Arabia's position market may be
jeopardized if the industrialized countries revert to their pre-1960 policy
(before OPEC was established and before nationalization started) of
ensuring sources of oil through special political relationships with select
producing countries. France, Russia, China, and Japan might invest in the
development of new fields in Iraq or Iran to ensure future supplies. That
American companies are banned from investing in these two countries gives
their foreign competition an advantage in exploiting ground-floor
opportunities. Should this come to pass, the French or other companies will
be less dependent on Saudi oil.

The same goes for the United States. According to early 1997 projections of
the U.S. government14, by the year 2010, the combined production of the
Americas will increase by approximately 5 million b/d, to the point that
the Americas as a whole will produce 26 million b/d. With consumption
projected at 35 million b/d, the Americas will produce three-fourths of
their oil needs in 2010. That last quarter will be covered in part by
imports from West Africa and the Persian Gulf, especially Saudi Arabia, the
UAE, and Kuwait. The United States may well attempt to secure its future
energy primarily from Latin America or central and west Africa (which it
recently declared to be strategic oil regions),15 and this could reduce
U.S. reliance on Saudi Arabia.

U.S. oil imports from Saudi Arabia peaked in 1991, reaching levels of 1.7
million b/d (an exceptional amount, covering the temporary disappearance of
both Kuwaiti and Iraqi oil from the market); the annual imports of Saudi
oil by the United States during the past two decades, averaged 1.2 million
b/d. Already in 1996, Saudi Arabia lost its top ranking as a U.S. supplier
to the combination of Venezuela, Canada, and Mexico. In May 1998, the U.S.
imports from Saudi Arabia dropped to 1.17 million b/d while imports from
Venezuela, Mexico and Canada exceeded 1.32 million b/d each. The decline in
U.S. imports from Saudi Arabia can be attributed in part to a round of cuts
on the part of oil producers, spearheaded by the Saudis, to push up prices.
16 According to U.S. forecasts, this situation will persist until the
period 2005-10. After this time, increasing U.S. oil demand will confront
only modestly increasing supply from the Americas. Until then and given the
strategic importance of its relationship with the United States, Riyadh
will no doubt try hard to retain its American market share.

The needs of the global and American market after 2010 will be an important
factor permitting Saudi Arabia roughly to double its production between
2000 and 2020.17 Most of the projected demand will come from the Asian
market. This means that Saudi Arabia, as well as other Gulf producers, will
ship the major part of its oil to this market. This shift in trade patterns
will have a significant impact on Saudi Arabia, which for two decades has
served as the linchpin supplier of oil to the United States.

*Saudi Arabia as Stabilizer*

The impact of changes in the energy market and in global consumption
patterns have taken their toll on Saudi Arabia's position. The country has
already lost some of its market share to new oil producers and, unless a
strategic shift in oil policy occurs, this trend will probably be
exacerbated during the next decade.

Still, Saudi oil policy has been consistently oriented towards providing
Western oil requirements at more economic prices and easing apprehensions
of oil shortages. Despite dramatic changes in the oil market, Riyadh
remains committed to preventing shortages in the global oil market by
maintaining spare production capacity (to help cope with unexpected
shortages of oil supplies). In 1983, Saudi Arabia had surplus capacity
estimated at 6 million b/d, 10 percent of world demand, which was about
half of the global total surplus. To be sure, Saudi surplus capacity has
declined since then, but it remains substantial. In 1997, Saudi Arabia's
spare capacity was estimated at only 3 percent of the world oil demand, but
it provided two-thirds of the total world surplus.

Maintaining so much spare capacity requires Saudi Arabia to forego
production of 2.3 million b/d in 1997.18 According to Zaki al-Yamani's
Center for Global Energy Studies, the cost of keeping oil facilities in a
state of constant preparedness requires a further annual expenditure of
around $100 million.19 As long as prices remain strong and world demand
rises, the Saudis appear prepared to make these sacrifices. But the late
1998-early 1999 drop in oil prices surfaced a Saudi demand that at least
the major oil producers share the burden of maintaining spare capacity.20
In practical terms this means that all the major oil exporters, and not
only the Saudis or OPEC, will be required to reduce their output if prices
are to be kept strong.

Despite the industrialized countries quest to diversify oil sources and
decrease dependency on Persian Gulf oil, U.S. forecasts continue to
allocate the role of accruing spare oil capacity almost exclusively to the
Gulf states and OPEC. One estimate forecasts the entire stockpile (2.8
million b/d) of spare capacity for the year 2020 will remain within OPEC
countries; 2.5 million b/d of that will derive from the Gulf region.21
These projections reveal the dilemma concerning Saudi Arabia: while OECD
countries readily rely on the Saudis to cover shortages, they try to
curtail their current dependency on Saudi oil.

Projected trends also point out that, despite a reduced role for the
Persian Gulf as a source of oil imports for the United States and Western
Europe (at least until 2010), the region will maintain its standing as the
major reservoir of oil reserves. Some 2/3 to 3/4 of the world's known
reserves are located in the Persian Gulf, a figure that has hardly changed
over the past two decades and is unlikely to change over the next two
decades. This implies that Saudi Arabia remains important to the Western
economy, despite its declining share in American and European oil supply.

*Saudi Oil Policy*

The Saudi share of the global oil market has fallen by over 30 percent in
the last fifteen years.22 As a result, some elements in Saudi Arabia are
thinking about the implications that will follow when their country losses
its status as the world's largest oil exporter. They are examining two
major questions: How important is it that Saudi Arabia retain its
distinction as the largest oil exporter; and what constitutes a minimum
level of production?

Answers to these questions have never explicitly been stated and appear to
be a matter of dispute. Some of the leadership is ready to give up the
"world's largest" adjectives so long as oil revenues cover Saudi
requirements. Others, more attuned to global oil demand or the impact of
oil price fluctuations on the development of energy alternatives, are more
conscious of the link between Saudi production and that of other producing
states. This internal division becomes clear when oil prices are low and
oil revenues do not cover budget expenditures (as was the case in 1998),
but it is less conspicuous when prices increase. In the absence of a
clearly defined oil strategy, Saudi policy will waiver between these two
poles and can be expected to be more directly influenced by the outcome of
factional jousting than strategic thinking.

Market share and price levels are the traditional mechanisms to optimize
oil production. If the Saudis currently cannot increase price levels, they
can increase market share, though this will place downward pressures on oil
prices, thereby aggravating the original problem. An attempt to increase
prices, on the other hand, will entail production cuts. Curtailing
production may result in additional losses of market share, especially if
other oil producers refuse to cooperate in this effort. In either case—low
prices but high output or low output but high prices—Saudi Arabia has to
settle for less than it had twenty years ago, when prices and output with
both high.

Another option is for Saudi Arabia to join forces with other oil producers
to raise prices. With oil sales comprising about 80 percent of its revenue,
Saudi Arabia itself can ill afford to keep prices down. However, under
current market conditions it is doubtful that OPEC can be successful at
raising prices more than temporarily. An alternative forum can be created
by organizing all major oil producers throughout the world, excluding the
smaller OPEC producers who have been increasingly able to influence OPEC
policies. Joining forces with the increasingly important non-OPEC oil
producers may yield significant advantages for Saudi Arabia.

Yamani has been an ardent advocate of the market share approach. Through
his London-based Center for Global Energy Studies, he advocates
concentrating on a long-term policy of enlarging market-share by lowering
oil prices23. Hani al-Yamani, Zaki's eldest son, takes this strategy to an
extreme; in his opinion, the decline in the centrality of oil as a source
of energy and the price reductions which ensued is an irreversible process
which will continue unless Saudi Arabia regains control over the oil
market. Rather than letting market forces shape Saudi Arabia, he claims
that Saudi Arabia should take the initiative and shape market forces. He
proposes to step up Saudi production to 20 million b/d over a five-year
period, lower oil prices to about $10 per barrel and obtain long-term
contracts to recapture a market share.24 In his view, this policy will
preempt the development of new oil fields and alternative sources of energy
by rendering them economically unfeasible. This, in turn, will increase
demand for Saudi oil.

While Hani's proposal may be too radical for Saudi decision makers, ‘Ali
al-Na‘imi, the Saudi petroleum minister, did suggest to OPEC in June 1998
the creation of a new core group of major producers to shape oil policy.
Unlike Hani's proposal, this one admits that Saudi Arabia cannot
single-handedly solve the problem of losing oil revenues and requires the
assistance of other producers. It does not, however, necessarily indicate a
preference for the oil price over the market share alternative.

Saudi Arabia can defend its position by flooding the market, as suggested
by Hani al-Yamani, or by creating a shortage by cutting oil production. At
present it appears that Saudi policy makers are reluctant to resort to
either of these extreme remedies. They will likely prefer a middle road, at
least for the short-term, to recoup oil revenues that will enable the
country to keep pace with the growing needs of its society. Most likely,
the short-term Saudi oil policy will combine the two paths, with an
emphasis on higher oil prices.

*Implications for the West*

Changes in world energy use have reduced the role of energy in the world
economy and the role of oil in the world energy picture. Furthermore,
changes in the world's oil production pattern have undermined the Gulf's
centrality as the main source of oil for the West. Plus, some Saudis – such
as Hani al-Yamani – argue that the country should dramatically increase its
oil output, which suggests the West has little reason to fear another oil
price shock like those of 1973 or 1979-80. At the same time, the Gulf's
position as the main source of global reserves remains unchallenged,
suggesting that Gulf security may still be a matter of concern to the West.

The validity of old perceptions regarding Western dependence on Gulf oil is
questionable, as is the notion that the West must protect Gulf oil. Graham
Fuller and Ian Lesser contend that the Pentagon allocates huge sums ($30-60
billion annually) for the Gulf's defense, while oil exports from the Gulf
to the United States were less than this amount (only approximately $30
billion).25 Even if the opinions expressed by Hani al-Yamani on the one
hand and Fuller and Lesser on the other are over-stated, they are worthy of
closer examination by decision makers.

It was once commonly believed that a crisis in the Gulf would most severely
affect oil importers while leaving the oil-producing countries relatively
unscathed. Well, that turned out not to be the case, as the experience of
the past two decades has repeatedly shown. In fact, Gulf oil exporters
turned out to be the primary losers from war and unrest in their region.
The Iran-Iraq and Kuwait wars both imposed enormous losses on the Persian
Gulf itself - without creating significant oil shortages or hardships for
importers. The bombing of Iranian oil installations, the embargo of Iraqi
oil and for a while Kuwait oil, the setting of hundreds of wells on
fire—all these led to an unexpected reduction in oil prices. This suggests
that those who should be most worried about Gulf security are the Gulf
countries, not Western oil importers.




__._,_.___
------------------------------
Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmcm9qdHBoBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDU4NzE3NTU->


[image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlcWhkNzRmBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ0NTg3MTc1NQ-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to