Related Resources

Dr. Franssen emphasized the importance of the Middle East to the global energy supply and demand. He looked at current rates of production and concluded that the production capacity of Middle Eastern countries, especially Saudi Arabia and Iraq, overwhelmingly surpasses those of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The Middle East has more than half of the world’s share of oil reserves and has yet to produce at its maximum capability. The world dependency on Middle East oil, combined with the International Energy Agency (IEA), not only creates higher market prices and a shortage of strategic reserves, but also will make IEA “a less powerful instrument” in case of severe oil disruptions. Using BP statistics, Dr. Franssen illustrated how US dependence on oil imports nearly doubled between 1973-2002 and suggested a similar pattern of increasing dependence was likely to continue over the next 25 years.

Since the oil shocks of the 1970s, levels of preparedness to deal with significant oil supply disruptions have significantly improved. Factors such as excellent market transparency, futures markets, IEA emergency stocks of 1.4 billion barrels, US supply reserves of 640 million barrels, past experience with management of oil crisis, and the decreased importance of oil to GDP, help make the global market more prepared to deal with future major turbulence in the sector. For example, the supply disruptions of Venezuela and Nigeria during 2003 had less impact than expected.

Dr. Franssen identified IEA and its strategic oil reserves as one of the two pillars of oil market security, Saudi Arabia being the second. Such oil import dependence poses concerns for supply security, especially as existing US relations with Saudi Arabia are currently under strain. Dr. Franssen explained that the “neo-cons” in the US are seeking alternative possibilities for energy security, looking to places such as the “new Iraq”, Iran, and Russia. All of these countries have been considered as counterweights to US dependency on Saudi Arabia. However, there are serious problems with all of these alternatives. With Russia’s halted plans for a Yukos-Sibneft merger and declining interest in foreign partnerships, it seems that President Putin is trying to centralize control of the oil sector. Similarly, the current security situation, the destruction of oil pipelines, ethnic tensions in the Shi’ite south, and the uncertainties of Iraq’s future government makes it an unreliable source of stability for future oil markets. America's turbulent past with Iran, and basic Iranian domestic political uncertainties, make the US reluctant to depend on it as a secure source of oil. Franssen observed that the failure to identify a future reliable supplier means that the US may have taken the dangerous turn of allowing its relationship with Saudi Arabia as a dependable resource to deteriorate before establishing feasible replacement oil sources.

Dr. Franssen concluded that although IEA is “still standing,” it is not likely to be very effective in the case of major oil disruptions. Additionally, it seems that the perceived second pillar of oil strength, Saudi Arabia, is slowly beginning to crumble. After comparing Europe’s consistent oil demands with the United States' steadily rising demands, Dr. Franssen urged that we not take the current oil availability for granted.