Qadhafi's Death Leaves Libyan Oil Industry Uncertain

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

The death of Libyan dictator Muammar Qadhafi marks the end of an era, both for the nation and its once-booming oil industry, choked off by the turmoil of the revolution. And as with prospects for the liberated Libyans to form a united, democratic government, the post-Qadhafi era begins with a sense of cautious optimism in the petroleum fields so essential to the nation's recovery.

Oil exports accounted for more than 95 percent of Libya's export earnings in 2010, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Since the fall of Tripoli in August, Libya's national oil company has moved quickly to restore output, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA), but thus far most production—down to around 300,000 to 400,000 barrels per day from a peak of about 1.6 million barrels daily—has been diverted to satisfy domestic demand.

Projections for the country's oil output have been revised slightly upwards, but questions remain about the extent of infrastructure damage caused by fighting, and power struggles within the nascent National Transitional Council could undermine efforts to get Libya's oil industry back online.

[Read: Qadhafi's Death Won't Mean End for U.S. Role in Libya.]

"If this leads to greater political clarity within Libya, and to a more stable operating and investment environment, then it may result in a more rapid restoration of the Libyan oil sector," David Fyfe, head of the IEA's oil industry and markets division, said in a statement. "However, many logistical, operational, and security-related challenges remain in that country, so we are not changing our underlying assumptions on Libyan production recovery for now. We still believe it could take many months for production to regain pre-crisis levels."

[Read: Politicians, World Leaders React to Qadhafi's Death.]

Most of the current oil production is derived from fields in the western and southern parts of the country, largely unaffected by fighting. While restoring production to pre-war levels may prove more difficult as the dust settles and damage is assessed, Libya has many advantages in its efforts to revitalize its oil industry.

For one, damage to the oilfields as a result of clashes between pro-Qadhafi forces and rebels appear to be relatively localized with the most damage affecting terminals and pipelines in the eastern side of the country. Production facilities in the western and southern regions have already started ramping up, according to Sarah Emerson, president of Energy Security Analysis Inc., who expects output to exceed 450,000 barrels by December.

"Now the question is as [production] continues to ramp up in excess of the refining requirements, then [Libya] can begin to export and that's where the money comes in," Emerson says. "[Qadhafi's death] is really incidental to the process. It starts a clock ticking, which says, 'Can you get the political stability together?'"

Emerson predicts conservatively that the country could see production of 800,000 to 1 million barrels by the end of next year, but full capacity very likely won't return until the end of 2013, she says.

[See photos of Muammar Qadhafi.]

The gradual re-entry of Libya—which holds Africa's largest proven oil reserves, according to the EIA—into global oil markets will likely ease pressure on supply and lower prices for refiners around the world.

"It's good news for the Europeans. It's good news for the East Coast United States," Emerson says.

mhandley@usnews.com

Home, Architecture and Furniture

Traveling Info

Read More

10 Years after 9 / 11 NATO future remains uncertain

Meeting in Brussels only a few hours after levels taken, Nick Burns, then US Ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, headquarters of the Alliance thought he had to do the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, some to convince the rest of the NATO member countries of America's defense to get. But rather than hesitate to show, he, America's allies immediately voluntarily says their support even before the accident had ROWCOUNT is clear. "It was a great moment of Alliance solidarity in a very tragic day," Burns, recalls the now an international relations Professor at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.

[Read more about NATO.]

All at once, was the original purpose of NATO both revived and overhauled shown. In fact, a renewed relevance in a cold war world was the attacks on America the Alliance on the basis of the values in the short term. But in the intervening ten years with the global fight against terrorism issues have also added new levels of complexity and new questions about the future of the Alliance.

12, September 2001 as an act of solidarity with Americans after the previous disaster, the allies article 5 - the binding promise of mutual defence of group - called for the first time in history. Originally developed in terms of Russia, article 5 says that all Member States "an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America are an attack against them all." The countries of the United States with the urgency and the energy State. "The expectation was for 50 years, it would be to overthrow that to defend Europe in a war against the Soviet Union the United States, and the irony was that the only time we had invoked per article 5, that the next day, and it for the Europeans was to overthrow, to defend the United States" said Burns.

The reality in the Middle, soon became clear there that the gesture had opened NATO up to a completely different set of challenges than previously had. On the one hand, the enemy was not a country but a group of non-State actors, al-Qaeda. The threat of terror were also allies, United caused by had is based on the term of protection of a geographical location, a new feature. She could not only defend their own territory; to fight the terrorists, they would have to go far above and beyond. "This was NATO's natural evolution after 9 / 11", said Burns. "It became very clear that Europe largely peaceful and safe was in the interests of allies of terrorism directly [and affected were] what was the wars in Afghanistan and the Iraq." "So, quickly became clear that NATO had to go natural geographic area, because the interests of our members were threatened by his outside."

[Read you like 9 / 11 U.S. immigration policy transformed.]

The threat of terrorism at this moment, more than per a global problem was when that could not successfully be fought by one country alone. Cooperation was importance it through NATO, the United Nations or ad-hoc partnerships. "We live in this age, when all that are really interesting security problems for a State to deal with, too big", says Jeff Lewis, Director of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterrey Institute of international studies program East Asia non-proliferation. "So, you have to have cooperation and alliances are an important aspect of cooperation."

Only a month after the World Trade Center and the Pentagon attack, news reports reflected hopeful mood that the tragedy could be an opportunity for rejuvenating the NATO, had been the decline of a common global topic through the last ten years. But as the United States began in October 2001, his campaign against terrorists in Afghanistan Americans, under the leadership of President George W. Bush at first seemed rejection of NATO efforts and take things into their own hands, says Stewart Patrick, Director of international institutions and global governance program at the Council on foreign relations. That changed in 2003, he says, according to the United States decided to invade the Iraq. "It was only partly, because the United States felt pretty thin after the invasion of Iraq, which really open was the United States to the concept of NATO, taking over the ISAF or the international security force in Afghanistan" Patrick says.

View the original article here

Peliculas Online

Read More