North America to be flooded with new oil production

The flood of North American crude oil is set to become a deluge as Mexico dismantles a 75-year-old barrier to foreign investment in its oil fields.

Plagued by almost a decade of slumping output that has degraded Mexico’s take from a $100-a-barrel oil market, President Enrique Pena Nieto is seeking an end to the state monopoly over one of the biggest crude resources in the Western Hemisphere. The doubling in Mexican oil output that Citigroup Inc. said may result from inviting international explorers to drill would be equivalent to adding another Nigeria to world supply, or about 2.5 million barrels a day.

That boom would augment a supply surge from U.S. and Canadian wells that Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) predicts will vault North American production ahead of every OPEC member except Saudi Arabia within two years. With U.S. refineries already choking on more oil than they can process, producers from Exxon to ConocoPhillips are clamoring for repeal of the export restrictions that have outlawed most overseas sales of American crude for four decades.

“This is going to be a huge opportunity for any kind of player” in the energy sector, said Pablo Medina, a Latin American upstream analyst at Wood Mackenzie Ltd. in Houston. “All the companies are going to have to turn their heads and start analyzing Mexico.”

Bloomberg

  • Mark Hanson

    If there’s a flood of North American oil and US refineries are “choking on more oil than they can process”, why allow the Saudi State to own half of America’s largest refinery and use it to import Saudi crude? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/business/texas-refinery-is-saudi-foothold-in-us-market.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 And the only thing Saudi Arabia exports more of than oil is Islamic extremism. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4470160 U.S. citizens are forced to subsidize expensive green energy while refined petroleum products are the country’s leading export, and now they want to export our crude? What about energy independence and national security? Check out “Saudi Arabia, China, and Arab Emirates, Own Critical US Energy Infrastructure”
    http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1351

    And US refineries are forced to blend ethanol and buy credits costing 16.9 Billion if they don’t. “The Ethanol Debacle” http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1679

  • Bat 1

    “… why allow the Saudi State to own half of America’s largest refinery and use it to import Saudi crude? ”

    Please explain exactly what federal law you would use to relieve the Saudis of their legal interest in that refinery.

    • Mark Hanson

      Bat 1, why does the U.S. put sanctions on Iranian oil imports and Iranian ownership of U.S. energy infrastructure? Could it be national security? Listen to this two minute clip of Republican Senator Jon Kyl describing the Saudi State as al Qaeda’s financial and ideological safe haven. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4470160 Saudi Arabia is a State sponsor of terrorism, just like Iran, that’s why we should throw the theofascist thugs out of our country and use North American oil to secure North American liberties.

      Furthermore, “free” markets are not based on the principle of efficient resource distribution. Or are we supposed to believe that shipping Saudi oil half way around the world to the U.S. is cheaper than using North American crude? And Saudi oil is heavy sour crude that’s more expensive to refine than light sweet Bakken crude. “Free” markets are all about creating a command and control global economy, a.k.a., globalization.

      • Bat 1

        Mark Hanson, I didn’t ask you WHY you advocated for a particular action. I asked you to provide a legal basis for that which you’ve proposed. The question isn’t going to go away simply because you try to change the subject.

        • Mark Hanson

          Bat 1, at some point, you’re attempts to play dumb are no longer amusing, and you passed that point long ago. Sanctions are a legal mechanism for evicting Saudi theofascists. Evidence that the Saudi State sponsors terrorism is presented by former CIA director James Woolsey and terrorism expert Alex Alexiev http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4350463

          • Bat 1

            Mark Hanson, I really don’t give a rat’s patoot whether or not you are amused. You stated that the Saudis ought not to own a US refinery. I asked you what the legal basis would be for relieving them of that ownership. If that’s simply too difficult for you to comprehend please tell me and I’ll leave you and your witless, self-promoting drivel alone.

          • Mark Hanson

            Bat patoot 1, what is it about sanctions against State sponsors of terrorism, as a legal basis for expropriating Saudi owned US assets, do you not understand?

  • Mark Hanson

    If there’s a flood of North American oil and US refineries are “choking on more oil than they can process”, why allow the Saudi State to own half of America’s largest refinery and use it to import Saudi crude? And the only thing Saudi Arabia exports more of than oil is Islamic extremism. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4350335 U.S. citizens are forced to subsidize expensive green energy while refined petroleum products are the country’s leading export, and now they want to export our crude? What about energy independence and national security? Check out “Saudi Arabia, China, and Arab Emirates, Own Critical US Energy Infrastructure”
    http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1351

    And US refineries are forced to blend ethanol and buy credits costing 16.9 Billion if they don’t. “The Ethanol Debacle” http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1679

Top