Non-binding it may have been, but the people of three Kurdish governorates and the city of Kirkuk have voted overwhelmingly to seek independence from Iraq. The movement for this has been building up over the years – Saddam Hussein’s administration kept it quashed but the subsequent political landscape in Iraq has encouraged it. The referendum, and its results, was quickly condemned by the central Iraqi government, as well as Kurdistan’s neighbours of Turkey and Iran.
The central Iraq government considers Kurdistan a renegade province, asserting that it holds sovereignty over the land and – more importantly – its oil riches. Yet, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) still calls the shots, and despite central protests, sells its own oil that powers its own economy. It is a situation analogous to China and Taiwan or Spain and Barcelona. The original proposition for the referendum was for the three major Kurdish regions. This had been given a lukewarm response by Iraq’s central government, but when it was expanded to include Kirkuk – where oil was first discovered in Iraq in 1927 – hackles were raised and retaliation was threatened.
At Iraq’s requests, Iran closed its airspace surrounding the Kurdish regions, preventing flights, while also conducting military exercises at the border in a show of force. Turkey condemned the referendum in no uncertain terms, going as far as threatening military intervention. The issue is optics. Turkey is dealing with its own restive Kurdish minority population, as is Iran, and the worry is that the referendum would spur Turkish and Iranian Kurds to band together to force an independent Kurdistan carved out of bits of Iraq, Iran and Turkey.
It is Turkey that the KRG should worry about. Even though the vote was declared as non-binding – merely an indication of the people’s desire of independence – Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim said the vote was ‘laying the ground for conflict.’ This is crucial because Turkey is the only conduit for Kurdish crude oil to reach the wider market, shipped via pipeline to the port of Ceyhan on the Mediterranean. Kurdish oil could pass through Iraqi ports, but because the Iraqi central government considers all oil produced within its borders under the authority of state crude marketing agency SOMO, the KRG would receive no revenue from this. And now Turkey is threatening to close this sole valve, which would leave the landlocked KRG with much oil and no place to sell it. And the KRG has a lot of oil. The region produced some 550,000 b/d of oil last year, and looks set to boost output to 600,000 b/d, putting it on par with OPEC members Qatar and Ecuador. The entire region itself is estimated to hold some 45 billion barrels of crude reserves, which is more than Nigeria. This is the root of the conflict. The region is rich – very rich – in oil. And the Iraqi government will not let it go without a fight.
Worst still for the KRG is that Turkey is now leaning to treating all oil originating from Iraq as under Iraqi central control through SOMO. The current pipeline leading to Ceyhan is controlled by the Kurds and piggybacked upon by the federal North Oil Company; Turkey’s new policy would mean that revenue from all that oil will go to Iraq, not split between the KRG and Iran as it now is. It may not lead to that. Most signs are pointing to this being political bluster and grandstanding to indicate disapproval. Oil continues to flow through the Turkish pipeline without any interruption, and looks set to do so for a while. The KRG has recently signed plans with Russia’s Rosneft to build and expand natural gas pipelines in Kurdistan, while Chevron drilled its first exploration well in the Sarta block in Iraqi Kurdistan in two years.
What the referendum has achieved, is to draw the lines in the battleground for Kurdistan. These lines will not be crossed. They will form the basis of negotiation between the KRG and the Iraqi government on how best to move forward with their relationship. The KRG cannot afford to make new enemies; their ‘friends’ in Turkey and Iran are problems enough. But what they have is oil. And that is a very good bargaining chip in their quest for independence.
Something interesting to share?
Join NrgEdge and create your own NrgBuzz today
The global oilfield scale inhibitor market was valued at USD 509.4 Million in 2014 and is expected to witness a CAGR of 5.40% between 2015 and 2020. Factors driving the market of oilfield scale inhibitor include increasing demand from the oil and gas industry, wide availability of scale inhibitors, rising demand for biodegradable and environment-compatible scale inhibitors, and so on.
Download PDF Brochure @ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/pdfdownloadNew.asp?id=268225660
The oilfield scale inhibitor market is experiencing strong growth and is mainly driven by regions, such as RoW, North America, Asia-Pacific, and Europe. Considerable amount of investments are made by different market players to serve the end-user applications of scale inhibitors. The global market is segmented into major geographic regions, such as North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, and Rest of the World (RoW). The market has also been segmented on the basis of type. On the basis of type of scale inhibitors, the market is sub-divided into phosphonates, carboxylate/acrylate, sulfonates, and others.
Carboxylate/acrylic are the most common type of oilfield scale inhibitor
Among the various types of scale inhibitors, the carboxylate/acrylate type holds the largest share in the oilfield scale inhibitor market. This large share is attributed to the increasing usage of this type of scale inhibitors compared to the other types. Carboxylate/acrylate meets the legislation requirement, abiding environmental norms due to the absence of phosphorus. Carboxylate/acrylate scale inhibitors are used in artificial cooling water systems, heat exchangers, and boilers.
RoW, which includes the Middle-East, Africa, and South America, is the most dominant region in the global oilfield scale inhibitor market
The RoW oilfield scale inhibitor market accounted for the largest share of the global oilfield scale inhibitor market, in terms of value, in 2014. This dominance is expected to continue till 2020 due to increased oil and gas activities in this region. The Middle-East, Africa, and South America have abundant proven oil and gas reserves, which will enable the rapid growth of the oilfield scale inhibitor market in these regions. Among the regions in RoW, Africa’s oilfield scale inhibitor market has the highest prospect for growth. Africa has a huge amount of proven oil reserves and is one of the leading oil producing region in the World. But political unrest coupled with lack of proper infrastructures may negatively affect oil and gas activities in this region.
Major players in this market are The Dow Chemical Company (U.S.), BASF SE (Germany), AkzoNobel Oilfield (The Netherlands), Kemira OYJ (Finland), Solvay S.A. (Belgium), Halliburton Company (U.S.), Schlumberger Limited (U.S.), Baker Hughes Incorporated (U.S.), Clariant AG (Switzerland), E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (U.S.), Evonik Industries AG (Germany), GE Power & Water Process Technologies (U.S.), Ashland Inc. (U.S.), and Innospec Inc. (U.S.).
Speak to Analyst @ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/speaktoanalystNew.asp?id=268225660
Scope of the Report:
Get 10% FREE Customization on this Study @ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/requestCustomizationNew.asp?id=268225660
Headline crude prices for the week beginning 9 December 2019 – Brent: US$64/b; WTI: US$59/b
Headlines of the week
In the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) International Energy Outlook 2019 (IEO2019), India has the fastest-growing rate of energy consumption globally through 2050. By 2050, EIA projects in the IEO2019 Reference case that India will consume more energy than the United States by the mid-2040s, and its consumption will remain second only to China through 2050. EIA explored three alternative outcomes for India’s energy consumption in an Issue in Focus article released today and a corresponding webinar held at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.
Long-term energy consumption projections in India are uncertain because of its rapid rate of change magnified by the size of its economy. The Issue in Focus article explores two aspects of uncertainty regarding India’s future energy consumption: economic composition by sector and industrial sector energy intensity. When these assumptions vary, it significantly increases estimates of future energy consumption.
In the IEO2019 Reference case, EIA projects the economy of India to surpass the economies of the European countries that are part of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the United States by the late 2030s to become the second-largest economy in the world, behind only China. In EIA’s analysis, gross domestic product values for countries and regions are expressed in purchasing power parity terms.
The IEO2019 Reference case shows India’s gross domestic product (GDP) growing from $9 trillion in 2018 to $49 trillion in 2050, an average growth rate of more than 5% per year, which is higher than the global average annual growth rate of 3% in the IEO2019 Reference case.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2019
India’s economic growth will continue to drive India’s growing energy consumption. In the IEO2019 Reference case, India’s total energy consumption increases from 35 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) in 2018 to 120 quadrillion Btu in 2050, growing from a 6% share of the world total to 13%. However, annually, the level of GDP in India has a lower energy consumption than some other countries and regions.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2019
In the Issue in Focus, three alternative cases explore different assumptions that affect India’s projected energy consumption:
EIA’s analysis shows that the country's industrial activity has a greater effect on India’s energy consumption than technological improvements. In the IEO2019 Composition and Combination cases, where the assumption is that economic growth is more concentrated in manufacturing, energy use in India grows at a greater rate because those industries have higher energy intensities.
In the IEO2019 Combination case, India’s industrial energy consumption grows to 38 quadrillion Btu more in 2050 than in the Reference case. This difference is equal to a more than 4% increase in 2050 global energy use.