How Big Oil Could Help on Climate Change in Iraq
Look at this satellite image of fires rising up from Iraq:
These hot spots, detected from 500 miles into space, were not sparked by bombings or by gunfire on the war-torn ground. They are neither flames of insurgency nor of combat. This is a snapshot of energy waste and the pointless release of millions of tons of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.
This image shows the flaring, or burning, of natural gas that is brought to the surface as the Iraqis extract oil. There's no way to get the oil out without releasing this "associated" gas. Flaring is the cheap and dirty way to get rid of this combustible fuel when there are no pipelines, gas-fired power plants, or export terminals nearby. Iraq is by no means alone in gas flaring; it is the fourth-worst offender in the world, behind Russia, Nigeria, and Iran. Sadly, flaring still goes on in remote oil fields in the United States, although the volumes are much reduced over the years and much less than in Iraq and the other top-flaring countries.
I hope to write more about global gas flaring in the future, but it is the situation in Iraq—one of 22 countries where flaring has increased since the mid-1990s—that bears looking at now. As this Reuters story details, the Iraqi government is now having the world's oil companies register to compete for service contracts to help it develop its oil infrastructure. Of course, the main aim of the oil companies is to partner with Iraq, for a share of the profit, in increasing oil production from the fourth-largest proven petroleum reserves in the world. But it is quite possible that some of the earlier deals that will be struck between Big Oil and Iraq will be aimed at stopping the flaring and using the natural gas—both to generate power within electricity-starved Iraq and to sell abroad. As the U.S. Energy Information Administration notes here, Shell, for example, has worked on a master natural gas plan for Iraq.
Those knowledgeable about Iraq say the country is now flaring 600 million cubic feet per day of natural gas. (The World Bank, which spearheads a Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership, has a slightly higher estimate, based in part on the satellite study of data through 2006 it commissioned from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration—source of the photo above— but I'll use the more conservative figure.) It's wasting a fuel that can be used to generate electricity, at a time when Iraq is generating only half of the power it needs to meet demand. The amount of gas Iraq is throwing away is equal to the natural gas consumption of countries like Syria, Norway, and Singapore. If valued at the wellhead price for natural gas in the United States over the past couple of years ($6.40 per thousand cubic feet), it would be worth $1.4 billion a year. And by burning the gas, it is releasing millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually.
But capturing that gas and putting it to use will take pipelines, power plants, and other expensive investments, and that's where Iraq would like the Big Oil companies and their huge cash reserves to come in. How quickly that's going to happen is uncertain, since Iraq has not yet passed a law that would set the ground rules for such deals. Iraqi Oil Minister Hussein Shahristani recently said his country would begin negotiations without waiting for the legislation. But Shell's chief executive officer, Jeroen van der Veer, noted a couple of weeks ago that the petroleum law was still a "matter outstanding" that needed to be dealt with. "We would like to work in Iraq," he said. "But we would like to know what the rules of the game are."
The idea of major oil companies making their entrée into Iraq is anathema to many, particularly those who opposed the war, and in fact, British activist groups have organized a "Hands off Iraqi Oil" day of protest on February 23.
But the picture that's emerging is complicated. What if Big Oil's moves in Iraq include addressing the fuel waste and needless climate burden of gas flaring? Even if the oil companies' eyes remain on the prize of profitable oil production sharing agreements, the beneficial outcome of capturing natural gas—a cleaner fuel than the oil that Iraq now uses to generate most of its inadequate electricity—is something that has to be considered. I'd be interested in what people who care about climate change, energy supply, and the role of oil companies in the world think about the problem of putting out these fires in Iraq.
Tags: Iraq | environment | global warming | oil | greenhouse gases
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (5)
Reader Comments
I am unaware of the relative amounts of CO2 from flaring. Nonetheless, my impression is that methane from agricultural sources comprises a bigger threat. In the agricultural sector, where Big Oil could help is to encourage more responsible (read less) use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides.
A more signifcant change by Big Oil would be fostering use of increasingly more responsible ethanol in the transportation sector.
Since either initiative could have a negative impact upon profits, my impression is that they are more comfortable destroying life as we know it on the planet while maintaining denial of such consequence.
Over 400 World Wide Prominent Scientists Dispute Man-Made Global Warming
Over 400 World Wide Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007. See http://tinyurl.com/2dv6nz
Global Warming Denialism Is Beside the Point
The list of 400 is a sham that has been thoroughly debunked in many places, including here http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/12/21/112933/48 and here http://climateprogress.org/2007/12/21/debunking-inhofe-report-over-400-prominent-scientists-disputed-man-made-global-warming-claims-in-2007-andy-revkin/
Flaring gas is a big problem, and a wasteful behavior no matter whether you deny global warming or not. Would you think it good for the air in your house to leave the gas stove on burning, day and night?
I have thought on may occasions about how the war in Iraq has added to the global carbon footprint. Oil well fires, bombs of all kinds, enormous military presence, etc. Thanks for bringing this specific problem to our attention. It is another measure of the horrible waste of the last 8 years -- doing nothing to address global warming, and making it worse by starting an unwarranted war. Shame.
Why Iraq Should Remember Saro-Wiwa
Just over twelve years ago, the Ogoni activist and writer Ken Saro-Wiwa was murdered by the military junta in Nigeria for campaigning against the ecological destruction of his homeland and for asking for a greater share of the oil wealth.
Twelve years after his death, the Niger Delta remains in deep trouble. As Reuters reported this week “A wave of violence targeting Nigeria’s oil facilities shows no sign of abating and may get worse, analysts and security experts say.”
The main target for Saro-Wiwa’s campaigning had been the oil giant Shell that has been extracting oil in the Delta since the late fifties.
Saro-Wwia accused the oil giant of polluting his beloved homeland and of operating to double standards, and of “genocide” towards his people. He wrote passionately about the polluted water courses, and the constant gas flaring that roared in the African night.
For over fifty years Shell has flared gas, as it was cheaper to flare it than use it. The ecological and human damage of this policy is incalculable. The company has ignored government law and law, and court order after court order to continue to flare and poison the African sky. To Ken and the people of Africa, Shell was and remains a climate criminal.
But suddenly big oil is being seen as the saviour of Iraq. It has taken some time in coming, but big oil’s defenders are now fighting back. Take the recent post by Marianne Lavelle, a senior writer for U.S.News & World Report.
In an article entitled “How Big Oil Could Help on Climate Change in Iraq” she talked about the needless gas flaring in Iraq and wrote about Shell’s master natural gas plan for Iraq.
Lavelle wondered “What if Big Oil’s moves in Iraq include addressing the fuel waste and needless climate burden of gas flaring? Even if the oil companies’ eyes remain on the prize of profitable oil production sharing agreements, the beneficial outcome of capturing natural gas—a cleaner fuel than the oil that Iraq now uses to generate most of its inadequate electricity—is something that has to be considered. I’d be interested in what people who care about climate change, energy supply, and the role of oil companies in the world think about the problem of putting out these fires in Iraq.”
My response would be to look at Nigeria and the lessons from there, because some fifty years after they started operating the oil companies have not put out the flares there. Back in 1992, Ken Saro-Wiwa wrote in his book Genocide in Nigeria: “As a final mark of their genocidal intent and insensitivity to human suffering, Shell and Chevron refuse to obey a Nigerian law which requires all oil companies to re-inject gas into the earth rather than flare it. Shell and Chevron think it cheaper to poison the atmosphere and the Ogoni and pay the paltry penalty imposed by the government of Nigeria than re-inject the gas as stipulated by the regulations”.
The lesson from Nigeria is one of ruthless exploitation and horrendous degredation. When people protest against Iraq’s Oil Law over the next few says, I am sure Saro-Wiwa will be with them in spirit, because it is a law that protects Big Oil above the people and the environment. And the lessons of Nigeria have not been heeded…
http://priceofoil.org/2008/02/20/why-iraq-should-remember-saro-wiwa/
Add your thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our comment guidelines.advertisement
Update: I was e-mailed a good question about how much CO2 is emitted by gas flaring. The World Bank says eliminating gas flaring worldwide would reduce 400 million tons of carbon dioxide, more carbon dioxide than all the projects currently registered under the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism, which is aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the developing world.
Iraq is responsible for about 5 percent of global flaring by the World Bank's reckoning, so that would put its contribution at 19 million tons annually. As I mentioned above, some of the estimates out there are more conservative than the World Bank's, so it might be more like 15 million tons.
Feb 15, 2008 16:02:31 PM [permalink] [report comment]