| Author |
Message |
theAutumn45
Rocker
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Posts: 796
|
 Posted:
Aug 06, 2007 - 11:56 AM |
 
|
| Post subject: Now - who should own the South Pole? |
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070802.wrussia02/ BNStory/Science/?cid=al_gam_nletter_newsUp
Russian mini-subs plant flag at North Pole sea bed
UNNATI GANDHI AND ALAN FREEMAN
Globe and Mail Update
August 2, 2007 at 2:09 PM EDT
Russian explorers dived deep below the North Pole in a submersible on Thursday and planted a national flag on the seabed to stake a symbolic claim to the energy riches of the Arctic.
Meanwhile, on the surface, Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay dismissed the Russian's flag-planting tactics "just a show."
A mechanical arm dropped a specially made rust-proof titanium flag onto the Arctic seabed at a depth of 4,261 metres under the surface, Itar-Tass news agency quoted expedition officials as saying.
The expedition leader, Artur Chilingarov, who was aboard one MIR 1 three-person sub, told colleagues on a research ship on the surface that his craft had reached the seabed.
Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at UBC discusses Russia's stake to the north
"The landing was smooth, the yellowish ground is around us, no sea dwellers are seen," he said, according to the ITAR-Tass news agency.
As part of the expedition aimed at claiming vast swaths of the Arctic Ocean seabed, the Rossiya atomic icebreaker burrowed a path to the Pole through a sheet of multiyear ice, clearing the way for the Akademik Fedorov research ship. But the Russian effort, which will also gather geologic samples and look into the possibility of the Arctic shelf containing nine billion tonnes of oil and gas deposits, is seen by Canadian experts as not much more than a symbolic gesture.
Mr. MacKay, speaking to reporters at the Conservative caucus summer retreat in Charlottetown, PEI, said the move was no threat to Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic.
Look, this isn't the 15th century. You can't go around the world and just plant flags and say 'We're claiming this territory,'" MacKay said.
"Our claims over our Arctic are very well established."
NDP MP Dennis Bevington (Western Arctic) criticized the Harper government on the issue Thursday, saying the Russian mission "demonstrates a troubling reality for Northern communities and all Canadians concerning Arctic sovereignty."
"It shows just how far behind Harper and the Conservatives are when it comes to asserting our legitimate claim to Arctic sovereignty," Mr. Bevington said in a release. "This clearly demonstrates what the issues are and the actions that we should be taking. Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay has been missing in action when it comes to blatant land grab photo-ops like this one."
Michael Byers, Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia, said the planting of the titanium Russian flag in the waters at the Pole has no legal significance but it does make a point.
"The planting of the flag is purely political symbolism and most of that is directed at a Russian audience but it does send a reminder to places like Ottawa of the very impressive Arctic capabilities that the Russians have," he said in an interview.
However, he does give credit to the Harper government for placing more emphasis on Arctic sovereignty, most notably the announcement last month of plans to spend $3.1-billion on six to eight patrol vessels capable of operating in ice up to a metre thick and on construction of a deep-water port in the North to service them.
The Russian moves put extra importance on the Prime Minister's planned visit to the Arctic next week. "That trip to the Arctic will not hurt," Prof. Byers said.
But the real urgency is for Canada to undertake seismic mapping of the ocean floor, which is essential to Canada's scientific assertion of sovereignty over the far reaches of the Arctic. The government is planning to use Canada's aging icebreaker, the Louis S. St-Laurent, to undertake some of the work but Prof. Byers said it's essential to charter a heavy icebreaker from the Finns or even the Russians to get the work done in time.
Canada must make its claim to the continental shelf by the end of 2013 under terms of its ratification of the UN Law of the Sea. Russia is making its own claim by the end of this year to the same UN agency.
But there are only five extreme-depth submarines in the world that can reach the depths of the Arctic Ocean: the French, the Americans and the Japanese each have one, while the Russians have two.
The fact that Canada, of which 40 per cent is the Arctic, does not have the capability of getting to the sea floor at the Pole is significant, according to Joe MacInnes, a Canadian diver who led the first team of scientists to dive under the ice at the North Pole.
"I've always taken the position that it's one thing to claim sovereignty. It's another thing to be able to go to the place that you claim. The Russians at least have got a sub that takes them to the bottom, that's the place that they're claiming."
Sergey Petrov, chargé d'affaires at the Russian embassy in Ottawa, said the expedition is an extension of the historic interest Russia has taken in the Arctic, dating as far back as the 1930s. The placement of the Russian flag is only part of the reason they'll descend to the sea floor.
"I'm sure that every nation that would do such a heroic [expedition] would put something precious at the place, and the national flag is something that's respected and is considered the most precious symbol."
With report from Associated Press and Reuters |
|
|
|
|
shanghaiceltic
Board Royalty
Joined: Sep 20, 2005
Posts: 7588
Location: Perth WA
Status: Offline
|
| Posted:
Aug 06, 2007 - 12:04 PM |
|
|
Err they planted the flag on the sea bed in the North. But basically no one should own either the Arctic or Antarctic.
By Russian reasoning (pointed out in a post much earlier than this) the UK could re-establish a claim to France (or vice versa) and the whole of Europe and any other nation make a claim to other countries by the fact that a ridge exists under the sea. |
_________________
I have parrallel bars at home, one for gin and one for whiskey |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 01:48 PM |
|
|
| shanghaiceltic wrote: |
| By Russian reasoning (pointed out in a post much earlier than this) the UK could re-establish a claim to France (or vice versa) and the whole of Europe and any other nation make a claim to other countries by the fact that a ridge exists under the sea. |
Under UN law a state can claim a 200 nautical mile exclusive zone and beyond that up to 150 nautical miles of rights on the seabed.
The Russians have already had a claim rejected in 2001 so this flag planting is merely symbolic. Nothing to worry about SC. |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
hc
Post Roaster
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 4545
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 01:59 PM |
|
|
"Nothing to worry about SC."
That's so naive.
Nothing to worry about except that they have nukes and are the biggest oil exporter in the world now (the Saudis have bigger pumping capacity though).
Ah, they also export most of their gas and oil to Western Europe and, in mere 10 years when the North Sea oil is gone, Britain will pretty much let Russia do whatever it wants while buying their oil.
(Oh wait, no, scratch that, they have the oil robbed from the people of Iraq..The Opium Wars of the 21st Century...)
And even if they didnt supply all this oil to all the buyers they need political favors from, I doubt anyone would fk around with them, even Nato.
The rules of the game are very simple: there is a time window closing for this kind of action, given the US' mess in Iraq.
It's time for everyone (Nigeria, Venezuela, Russia, Iran) to get as much as they can while they can.
Will be fun to watch.
I'd buy Lockheed Martin now, but wouldnt put money in our corrupt english friends at BAE though, as a matter of principle. |
_________________
Click here to read the latest retarded PM Natalie sent me. Let's make her lose face and FINALLY leave this site. |
|
 |
|
HoboJuice
Veejay
Joined: Feb 26, 2007
Posts: 1954
Status: Offline
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 02:21 PM |
|
|
i'm claiming my chair hobotopia |
|
|
 |
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 02:33 PM |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Ah, they also export most of their gas and oil to Western Europe and, in mere 10 years when the North Sea oil is gone, Britain will pretty much let Russia do whatever it wants while buying their oil. |
Now who’s being naïve? Europe will just get its oil from Libya, Algeria and Norway.
| Quote: |
| And even if they didnt supply all this oil to all the buyers they need political favors from, I doubt anyone would fk around with them, even Nato. |
Russia’s fcked. It will never be a rich country because there’s very little skilled labour and most of the adult population is poisoned with alcohol. Believe or not hc, Russia needs Europe more than we need them – Europe makes things that work…. |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
ShanghaiUnderground
StreetBeater
Joined: July 15, 2004
Posts: 2413
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 02:36 PM |
|
|
I guess when the Russian Bear planted her flag in Afghanistan in '79 or Czechoslovakia in '68 etc etc, it was merely symbolic, too. |
_________________
"And this also," said Marlow suddenly, "has been one of the dark places of the earth." |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 02:39 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
hc
Post Roaster
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 4545
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 02:47 PM |
|
|
| wolfy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Ah, they also export most of their gas and oil to Western Europe and, in mere 10 years when the North Sea oil is gone, Britain will pretty much let Russia do whatever it wants while buying their oil. |
Now who’s being naïve? Europe will just get its oil from Libya, Algeria and Norway.
| Quote: |
| And even if they didnt supply all this oil to all the buyers they need political favors from, I doubt anyone would fk around with them, even Nato. |
Russia’s fcked. It will never be a rich country because there’s very little skilled labour and most of the adult population is poisoned with alcohol. Believe or not hc, Russia needs Europe more than we need them – Europe makes things that work…. |
Wolfy, in case you dont know Norway's oil comes from the North Sea.
Lybia? Ha. Now that the oil situation is scary Gadafi is a fellow again eh? Hypocrites. Oil whores!
Lybia's and Algeria's production are very small. And gas is a much bigger problem.
Not sufficient.
Uh-oh, I guess it's back to stealing oil from the Iraqi people and bending over to Putin (who will only get out of his seat if murdered).
"there’s very little skilled labour"
Oh sure. So I presume all their scientific achievement and weapons industry is imported. Interesting.
From China right?
In case you don't know last year, I think it was with Ukraine?, Russia shut down their entire gas pipeline to Ukraine and Western Europe and everybody in Europe was begging them to turn on the pipes again, which they did. Was a massive display of weakness and the Russians know that. |
|
|
|
|
|
ShanghaiUnderground
StreetBeater
Joined: July 15, 2004
Posts: 2413
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 02:56 PM |
|
|
My point, wolfy, was that I am not certain that UN "laws" ever, ever stopped any country from doing whatever the fuq they choose. Russia doesn't give a rat's arse about UN mandates, especially and more so when their own national interests are at stake. |
_________________
"And this also," said Marlow suddenly, "has been one of the dark places of the earth." |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 02:59 PM |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Wolfy, in case you dont know Norway's oil comes from the North Sea. |
That shows how little you know. There are vast unexploited oil fields in the Norwegian Sea to the west of Norway.
| Quote: |
| Lybia? Ha. Now that the oil situation is scary Gadafi is a fellow again eh? Hypocrites. Oil whores! |
Again you obviously know knothing about Libya. They were welcomed back by EVERYONE in the international community after they paid compensation to the Lockerbie families.
| Quote: |
Lybia's and Algeria's production are very small. And gas is a much bigger problem.
Not sufficient. |
Ah, NOW you mention gas. Can it be you didn't realise that Europe (bar the Germans) doesn't import that much oil from Russia anyway...
| Quote: |
"there’s very little skilled labour"
Oh sure. So I presume all their scientific achievement and weapons industry is imported. Interesting. |
Is that the same technology that NO ONE uses in the West? |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI
Last edited by wolfy on Aug 07, 2007 - 03:02 PM; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 03:01 PM |
|
|
| ShanghaiUnderground wrote: |
| My point, wolfy, was that I am not certain that UN "laws" ever, ever stopped any country from doing whatever the fuq they choose. Russia doesn't give a rat's arse about UN mandates, especially and more so when their own national interests are at stake. |
I know what you're saying but realistically Russia can't get away with as much as they could in the 60s and 70s. They could never claim the whole pole when Canada, the US and Denmark have equal claims. It'll get divided up by longitude. |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
ShanghaiUnderground
StreetBeater
Joined: July 15, 2004
Posts: 2413
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 03:12 PM |
|
|
| wolfy wrote: |
| ... Russia can't get away with as much as they could in the 60s and 70s. |
I think that made sense up until not long after Putin came to power. But Putin is a throwback to the cold war era, and I wouldn't put anything past him. |
_________________
"And this also," said Marlow suddenly, "has been one of the dark places of the earth." |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 03:19 PM |
|
|
I know what you mean about Putin - nasty piece of work. But remember the whole reason the Soviet Empire collapsed is because the Americans outspent them. The Russians tried to keep up but the wheels came off and they lost the ideological battle. The days of Russia being an alternative economic system and thus way of life are gone forever - that's where raw military strength falls down if there's no prosperity or belief involved to back it up. |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
hc
Post Roaster
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 4545
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 03:58 PM |
|
|
| wolfy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Wolfy, in case you dont know Norway's oil comes from the North Sea. |
That shows how little you know. There are vast unexploited oil fields in the Norwegian Sea to the west of Norway.
| Quote: |
| Lybia? Ha. Now that the oil situation is scary Gadafi is a fellow again eh? Hypocrites. Oil whores! |
Again you obviously know knothing about Libya. They were welcomed back by EVERYONE in the international community after they paid compensation to the Lockerbie families.
| Quote: |
Lybia's and Algeria's production are very small. And gas is a much bigger problem.
Not sufficient. |
Ah, NOW you mention gas. Can it be you didn't realise that Europe (bar the Germans) doesn't import that much oil from Russia anyway...
| Quote: |
"there’s very little skilled labour"
Oh sure. So I presume all their scientific achievement and weapons industry is imported. Interesting. |
Is that the same technology that NO ONE uses in the West? |
It is well known that the Soviets are at least 10 years ahead in missile design and several other cutting edge areas of weapons development.
That's why NO ONE uses it: no one can have it. DOH!
Thanks for proving my point for me.
I thought that someone that jacks off to Jane's like you would know that.
Sonny, the North Sea and the Norwegian Sea will be depleted soon. There is the point for you but I understand that you need everything spelled out given we know you cant abstract at all, so, yes the Norwegian Sea and the North Sea are DIFFERENT BUT both of them face the same problem of having very limited reserves.
Don't trust me?
I knew you wouldn't buddy.
Here we go:
BP files Norwegian Sea oil and gas plan
OSLO (Reuters) - Britain's BP delivered to Norwegian authorities on Friday a $5 billion (2.49 billion pounds) plan for development and operation of the Skarv and Idun oil and gas fields in the Norwegian Sea, the company and officials said.
The production start-up is planned for the third quarter of 2011, BP's Norwegian subsidiary, BP Norge, said in a statement.
Advert for the New Scotsman Golf Service
The total recoverable resources are estimated at 106 million barrels of oil and condensate and 48.3 billion standard cubic metres of rich gas, BP said.
Oil production capacity is planned to be 85,000 barrels per day and gas output 15 million standard cubic metres per day, the company said. The development consists of the Skarv gas and oil field and the Idun gas field.
http://business.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1018982007
So, if math serves us right, 106 millions divided by 85,000 would give us around 3.5 years of output. Very good eh?
Let's say out of the 5 billions half goes to oil and half to gas (yes I know gas infra is more expensive). We are talking about 2.5 billion usd for 106 million barrels which means 24 dollars per barrel. Sonny, the oil your country is stealing from Iraq comes out of the ground at less than 1usd per barrel, so, keep robbing them and murdering their children so that you can drive your cars.
"There are vast unexploited oil fields"
Can you name five of them including their estimated lifetime? No you cant, because the lifetime is very short. Doh.
From the BP report for 2007: "Declines in Norway and Mexico were partially offset by increases in Russia and Brazil". Doh. By the way, Norway's reserves declined by more than 10% in 2006 alone! Oh, here we go with your phantom theory that Norway will save the western world.
And Lybia has been "accepted" after it started negotiations with EADS. Lybia has been "accepted" and the reason is simple: the "reparations" will come from the oil windfall. Doh.
Now, let's complete the complete spanking: Europe imported 665 million tonnes in 2006 and 290 million of them from Russia and only 96 mil tonnes from North Africa (where infrastructure lacks by the way). Also, Europe's imports from Russia are TWICE, that's right, TWO TIMES the amount they import from the Middle East.
"Ah, NOW you mention gas. "
Go back to my first post (which I am sure that to avoid further embarrassment and face loss you will say I edited, you little shiatweasel).
Wolfy, you are big fkng pretender and you will go to far greater lengths than any chinese person I know to save face. If one day google is not working you will be pulling watermelon carts in the sun.
To acknowledge that you are wrong never hurt anyone you know?
 |
|
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 04:52 PM |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If one day google is not working you will be pulling watermelon carts in the sun. |
That's a bit rich coming from someone who's just Googled a load of sh'it to back up his own spurious arguments. No one's allowed to use Google except you is that it? You must be a hypocrite.
| Quote: |
| Sonny, the North Sea and the Norwegian Sea will be depleted soon |
Soon? The Norwegian Sea has hardly been exploited yet. Looks like you don’t know what you’re talking about sonny Jim.
| Quote: |
"There are vast unexploited oil fields"
Can you name five of them including their estimated lifetime? No you cant, because the lifetime is very short. Doh. |
Åsgard, Kristin, Mikkel, Norne, Urd, and Heidrun
I don't know what they're lifespans are but I'm not just going to believe they are "very short" just because you assert so. Argument by assertion HC, it doesn't win you any real battles. |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 05:00 PM |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Europe imported 665 million tonnes in 2006 and 290 million of them from Russia and only 96 mil tonnes from North Africa (where infrastructure lacks by the way). |
It would only take a year to build a couple of new terminals and pipelines though. |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
hc
Post Roaster
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 4545
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 05:03 PM |
|
|
"That's a bit rich coming from someone who's just Googled a load of sh'it to back up his own spurious arguments. No one's allowed to use Google except you is that it? You must be a hypocrite. "
Actually I dont know if you know but I graduated from the Institute of Chartered Shipbrokers of London.
Took their 2 years course both in Denmark and later Hong Kong, in Dry Chartering and Tanker Chartering as well. Passed with pretty high grates and top ten percent in my class.
That summed with my degree in Mechanical Engineering and a lifelong interest in ships plus my two years education in shipping from The leading institution in Denmark gives me a bit of credibility in this subject.
Now chop chop put your baseball cap backwards and let's get back on the watermelon cart.
Your credentials?
"I don't know what they're lifespans are but I'm not just going to believe they are "very short" just because you assert so. "
Funny that when it is convenient to you, you google for the info, when it's not, you dont.
Now, I could go online and get the production per day and total number of barrels from each of the fields you mentioned and embarrass you even more, but I wont.
In fact, just the fact that you used this character here "Å" means you copied and pasted probably from a site with info about the oil fields, but cowardly you didnt paste them here.
Things are not looking good for you here eh?
Perhaps you should let the thread die a silent death after being embarrassed again, just like you did here http://www.shanghaiexpat.com/index.php?name=MDForum&file=viewtopic&t=6 3219
It was about time someone started calling you on the gibberish you post here now and then. In general you post good stuff, but when you notice someone arguing your points you either
silently retreats or try to win by tiring them with your drivel. |
_________________
Click here to read the latest retarded PM Natalie sent me. Let's make her lose face and FINALLY leave this site. |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 05:07 PM |
|
|
Argument by assertion - good one. If hc says I got spanked by him in a debate then it must be true eh?
Yeah right hc. Who's the one who can't listen to reason for fear of losing face? |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 05:10 PM |
|
|
| Quote: |
| In fact, just the fact that you used this character here "Å" means you copied and pasted probably from a site with info about the oil fields, but cowardly you didnt paste them here. |
Laughable argument really. You challenged me to name them. As if anyone could do that off the top of their head unless they worked in the industry.... |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
bougie
Board Buddha
Joined: Nov 20, 2004
Posts: 13292
Location: Wuhan Hubei China
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 05:44 PM |
|
|
I have made a few phone calls and our sub and jet plane is ready to kick some russian arse ... muhuahahaha |
|
|
|
|
|
hc
Post Roaster
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 4545
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 06:20 PM |
|
|
| wolfy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| In fact, just the fact that you used this character here "Å" means you copied and pasted probably from a site with info about the oil fields, but cowardly you didnt paste them here. |
Laughable argument really. You challenged me to name them. As if anyone could do that off the top of their head unless they worked in the industry.... |
That's not what I am saying. What I am saying is: at the same time you got the names you probably could with the same ease get the size and daily production of these fields just like the news I pasted above, and then you would see that the life span of these fields is 3 to 5 years max.
But probably since this would prove my point you just chickened out and didnt put the info here. Doh.
They have the comedy thing going on at Malone's, but why go if you can read wolfy's posts and laugh just as hard? |
|
|
|
|
|
wolfy
Fire-eater
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2510
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 06:50 PM |
|
|
Lo and behold! Here's an article from Newsweek highlighting everything I've mentioned:
Norwegian Gold
The Barents sea could become Europe's natural-gas Klondike—and an alternative to Russia.
Untapped, For Now: Barents Sea oil will soon be flowing into the Hammerfest waterfront
Jan. 8, 2007 issue - In the new age of energy scarcity, geography shapes politics. That's why Jonas Gahr Store travels with his own maps. Not for Norway's foreign minister the standard picture of a Europe centered on the Alps and the warm south. When starting talks with his European counterparts, Store likes to place on the table a very different map. At its center: the northernmost tip of the Scandinavian peninsula and the chilly waters of the Barents Sea high above the Arctic Circle. His message is simple. This is the geopolitical world as Norwegians see it.
That's not patriotism; it's a handy means of illustrating some new realities. Back during the cold war, the Barents—shared uneasily by Russia and Norway—was best known as a home for the prized Arctic cod and for hide-and-seek games between American and Soviet submarines. Today it's set to become Europe's energy Klondike, a last untapped pool of natural resources. Beneath the seabed lies not only oil but enough natural gas to meet much of the continent's needs for decades. And it's Norway that's heading the exploration race, with a first field due to come on stream later this year. "This whole region is re-emerging as something new on the European radar screen," says Store. "We have to go out with our maps and explain what it's all about."
He can expect an enthusiastic audience with European leaders ever more anxious for access to fresh energy supplies from friendly neighbors. These days Russia ranks as Europe's principal source of natural gas, and evidence of the Kremlin's readiness to use its status for political leverage has become frequent, whether it's in pricing spats with Ukraine last winter or with Belarus last month. "What has changed is that Russia has begun using energy as a political tool," says Dmitry Kisilev of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Strategic Studies Center. "Europeans fear that they will be next."
The dwindling of the EU's own gas supplies only intensifies those fears. The once abundant reserves in the North Sea are now in steep decline. Within 20 years, Britain could be 90 percent dependent on imported gas. The big consumers of Western Europe can look to other suppliers in the Middle East or North Africa—notably Algeria—to ease their dependence on Russia. But who wants to rely on distant countries of doubtful stability?
Small wonder, then, that Norway looks ever more attractive as a partner. Oslo has pledged that it won't abuse its strength to play politics. Says Store: "We don't take Russia as our role model." A nation heavily dependent on its oil and gas revenues can't afford to make enemies or relax its efforts to exploit its strengths. Last month its two biggest players in the oil and gas industry, Norsk Hydro and Statoil, announced a $30 billion merger to form the world's biggest offshore operator.
Europe can indeed take comfort from Norway's record. It's not only a big player in the oil market but also the world's third largest exporter of natural gas after Russia and Canada, doubling its foreign sales in the last six years. Exports to Europe are slated to rise by almost 50 percent over the next 15 years. These days it's meeting some 25 percent of the needs of France, Germany and the United Kingdom, and expansion continues. Last summer saw the opening of the world's longest undersea gas pipeline, at 1,200 kilometers, to carry supplies from the North Sea to a depot on the English coast. By 2011, Norway has promised to provide Europe with 135 billion cubic meters of gas a year, a rise of almost 50 percent on today's figure.
Much may flow from the so-far-untapped Barents. In the midwinter polar darkness, workers on an island just off the port of Hammerfest—the northernmost settlement in Europe—are now busily completing a terminal to receive gas from the Snohvit (Snow White) field some 140 kilometers offshore, the first venture in the region. By the end of 2007, the plant will be receiving a steady flow of gas to be frozen and liquefied for export to Europe and the United States. "This is just the start," says Sverre Kojedal of Statoil, the company responsible for the Snohvit field. "We think of the Barents Sea as Europe's new oil and gas province."
Sure, even the most determined optimist won't pretend that Norway can match Russia as a long-term supplier. Quantity alone gives the Russian energy giant Gazprom unrivaled clout. "Russia is sitting on a quarter of the world's natural gas," says Bjorn Brunstad of Econ, the Nordic economic consultancy. Russia's known reserves are estimated at 47.82 trillion cubic meters, compared with Norway's total of just 2.41 trillion. Its gas field in the Barents, Shtokman, which is still awaiting exploitation, could be 10 times the size of Norway's Snohvit. The wastelands of Siberia are believed to conceal still more generous reserves.
Besides, Norway is hindered by a tricky mix of political and ecological concerns that keep its operators away from what could be the richest patches of seabed. According to the World Wildlife Fund, the Barents is Europe's "last unspoiled marine environment," and worries over its possible pollution last summer persuaded the Oslo government to impose a five-year moratorium on exploring a promising area off its northern coast. At the same time, Norway and Russia are still struggling to resolve a 30-year dispute over their exact maritime border in the Barents that has so far kept rigs from both countries out of a 155,000-square-kilometer "gray zone."
Nevertheless, if the outcome of future exploration matches the geologists' best hopes, output from the Norwegian sector of the Barents could double by 2014. The technology is already moving ahead, fast opening up new possibilities. Forget rigs and costly plant above the water surface; thanks to some smart innovations, the Snohvit field will be drained by equipment resting on the seabed and operated remotely from onshore. In time, advances in technology may even allow for exploration beneath the polar ice. All that's certain, as Foreign Minister Store well knows, is that the definitive map of Europe's energy resources has still to be drawn. |
_________________
Good old English spirit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MG27BKwjaI |
|
|
|
|
hc
Post Roaster
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 4545
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 07:20 PM |
|
|
"Everything you mentioned" eh?
You are a joke.
Ok, before I go to the toilet, let's dispel the myths in your silly head:
Algeria's reserves at 12.3 thousand million barres is 3 times UK's which, according to the article are dwindling fast. So, Algeria is temporary relief.
Norway: their reserves are depleting FAST and as the article mentions "enough natural gas to meet much of the continent's needs for decades", it did not say OIL. So, the Russia problem remains. By the way, Norway's proven gas reserves declined some 15% from last year.
Then of course you highlight all these items to NO AVAIL: "output from the Norwegian sector of the Barents could double by 2014". You just forgot to highlight the beginning of the sentence which says "Nevertheless, if the outcome of future exploration matches the geologists' best hopes" so it is all hypothetical.
The potential on the BARENTS SEA can double. Now, 1 barrel of oil x 2 = 2 barrels of oil . If you consume 100 barrels, this extra 1 you are getting out of the Barents means squat.
So, the article proves NOTHING of what you said.
In fact it's title is contradictory: "Sure, even the most determined optimist won't pretend that Norway can match Russia as a long-term supplier." and "The Barents sea could become Europe's natural-gas Klondike—and an alternative to Russia. "
Of course an ignoramus would be lead to believe that suddenly Norway is the answer to all energy problems of the world. But you say, facts are bit different from what the newspaper says.
Further, oil consumption is on the increase and supply is on the decrease.
India and China are buying more and more oil. If Europe doesnt want Russian oil, Russia will sell it to India and China or Japan, or the US or ...
Differently from what your silly head thinks, oil is a SELLERS market, not a buyers market.
If it was a buyers market, the barrel of oil wouldnt be at over 80$ would it?
The reason there is all this talk about new oil projects in places such as the Barents is that at today's oil prices projects that wouldnt be economically feasible (meaning the cost to extract the oil is higher than the price of the oil itself) are today feasible.
However, as soon as your country finishes its job in Iraq (which I doubt it will do, and much more it will probably and cowardly leave it worse than it ever was), prices will decline, meaning all these exotic projects will again become a dream.
So, no the article doesnt prove any of your points, it speculates a lot. The fact that you are so desperate to not lose face and posted the first junk you googled tells volumes about your knowledge. |
_________________
Click here to read the latest retarded PM Natalie sent me. Let's make her lose face and FINALLY leave this site. |
|
|
|
|
underh20
Shanghai Royalty
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
Posts: 9647
Location: EOA Seminar
|
| Posted:
Aug 07, 2007 - 07:51 PM |
|
|
| Human Cesspool wrote: |
Actually I dont know if you know but I graduated from the Institute of Chartered Shipbrokers of London.
Took their 2 years course both in Denmark and later Hong Kong, in Dry Chartering and Tanker Chartering as well. Passed with pretty high grates and top ten percent in my class.
That summed with my degree in Mechanical Engineering and a lifelong interest in ships plus my two years education in shipping from The leading institution in Denmark gives me a bit of credibility in this subject. |
Damn, that sure pegged the Bull$hit-O-Meter! Giving you command of a ship is akin to giving a pig a watch. You cant even control your bowel movements. What makes you think you're responsible enough to control a ship? Stick to what you know: precisely adding milk to a bowl of cold cereal because as it stands the only thing you have down to a science, HC, is your thrice daily wank.
The only place you could stand a chance at graduating f | | |
Forum FAQ
Search
Preferences
Watched Topics
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
