Job Discussion Forums

[Central Command]

Long but interesting article:

Karen Elliott House: Can Saudi Arabia survive succession?
September 18, 2012

http://www.dailymail.com/Opinion/Commentary/201209170206

It seems stable, but it might be anything but that. FROM afar, Saudi Arabia appears immune from the turmoil and uncertainty engulfing nations such as Syria, Egypt and Libya.

But rather than being an oasis of stability in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia is nearing its own crisis point.

The elderly sons of Saudi Arabia's founder, King Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, who have ruled sequentially since his death in 1953, are approaching the end of the line. And as that happens, the future of this kingdom on which the world depends for oil has never been more precarious.

King Abdullah is nearly 90 and ailing. Crown Prince Salman is 76.

The royal family can continue to pass the monarchy to remaining brothers and half-brothers, but even the youngest of those is already in his late 60s.

None is likely to have the acumen and energy - or even the time - to usher in an era of reform to solve the kingdom's mounting problems: poor education, high unemployment, a corrupt bureaucracy, a sclerotic economy and an increasingly young and frustrated society...............

http://www.dailymail.com/Opinion/Commentary/201209170206

[Central Command]

From the Hat Trick letter that comes out monthly. The 19 SEP 2012 issue has this to say about Saudi Arabia:

http://www.goldenjackass.com

[scot47]

how can anyone take anything seriously that they find in the DAILY MAIL ?

As for Karen House

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Elliott_House

Does she speak or read Arabic ? Of course not. She has a degree in JOURNALISM !

[trapezius]

[veiledsentiments]

There is nothing outrageously incorrect in the article... and yes it is odd that it comes from a WV newspaper. It is the usual speculation about what will happen when... we've all read it before and/or thought it before... if we have had anything to do with the Gulf. It is the gorilla in the room.

No one really knows what goes on in the Royal Family... whether we speak and read fluent Arabic or not. We can merely sit on the outside and watch. There is a similar situation in Oman with succession.

Same with the production of petroleum products... all the "experts" in the field spout off about peak oil or not... or domestic vs export production. About how big the reserves are or how quickly they are dwindling. And their guesstimates vary wildly. Who to believe?

Get the popcorn and a cold drink...

VS

[desert_traveller]

another arrogant and ignorant but by all means rubbish article that was written in an air conditioned library or office somewhere in the 'west' by an 'expert'. not worth even the paper it is written on

[scot47]

First published in the "Wall Street Journal" and that is no better than the "Daily Mail" of London !

[johnslat]

I think this is the most reasonable thing I've seen on oil reserves:

" There's a lot of hype around about how much oil we have, but these are provable facts:

1) Geological Peak. That is the point where we have consumed half the oil in the ground. So far we have consumed a trillion barrels. Estimates of remaining oil range, but the number appears to be 3 trillion barrels remaining in the ground. So we are not at geological peak. Hence skeptics of peak oil use this for their arguments.

2) Flow Rate Peak. That's the point at which you cannot extract the oil fast enough to meet demand. This is especially so with old fields in decline (which is a fact) and new fields which have difficult geology (like this one). The flow rate from them does not keep up with decline, nor keep up with growing demand. North Sea is all in terminal decline and the UK has to now import oil. Indonesia peaked years ago and has to import oil forcing them out of OPEC. The Cantarell field in Mexico, the third largest in the world, and the US's 3rd import source, was producing 2.3mb/day at it's height. Today it's 560kb/day with a 41% drop from last year. WE ARE AT FLOW RATE PEAK NOW.

3) Geopolitical Peak. That's when exporting countries, due to their own growing demand, decide not to sell their oil abroad any longer but decide to keep what's in the ground for their own future domestic needs. So far only the US does this, but expect other countries to soon follow that.

4) ERoEI peak. This is the point at which it takes as many joules to extract the oil than you get from the oil extracted. That is, one barrel in to get 1 barrel out. Conventional wells in the 1960s were 100:1. That has dropped to about 25:1 today. Aging fields and new unconventional fields have very low ERoEI. The tar sands in Alberta for example is less than 6:1. Our entire society is based on the NET energy, not what's extractable. Calculations show that we will reach over all break even in oil extraction between 2020 and 2030. Once that is reached it basically means we have completely run out of oil.

5) Economic peak. This is the point where the economy cannot tollerate high oil prices and plunges the world into a recession, like this one which was caused by $140.barrel oil

Regards,
John

[trapezius]

[veiledsentiments]

I'm with you Trap... I thought she had most of her facts in order... saw nothing either arrogant nor ignorant. I guess some people think that only a resident/citizen/native speaker/whatever have the right to write.

She made no outrageous claims of knowing what was going to happen, nor any cheap shots at the culture.

VS
(I was just surprised that the WV paper thought its readers would be interested in the topic)

[posh]

[scot47]

WSJ, Washungton Post, Zeri i Populit or Pravda. it is STILL BS !

[Central Command]

[Grendal]

Don't start again, 'central command.'

I know we make mistakes and especially me with the iPad spellchecker that I don't know how to turn to turn off yet.

Be nice.

Grendal

[scot47]

Unlike many journalists I do not pretend to have a crystal ball or inside knowledge of the doings of the Saudi Court ! And what is the odd tyop between freindz ?