Since the Arab oil embargoes of the 1960s and 70s, it's been conventional wisdom to talk about American dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf. But the global oil market has changed dramatically since then.
Today, the U.S. actually gets most of its imported oil from Canada and Latin America.
And many Americans might be surprised to learn that the U.S. now imports roughly the same amount of oil from Africa as it does from the Persian Gulf. African imports were a bit higher in 2010, while Persian Gulf oil accounted for a bit more last year.
Where The U.S. Gets Its Oil
Source: Energy Information Administration
Credit: Nelson Hsu / NPR
America is one of the world's largest oil producers, and close to 40 percent of U.S. oil needs are met at home. Most of the imports currently come from five countries: Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela and Nigeria.
Desert Kingdoms Versus The Great White North
Canada is far and away the biggest purveyor of crude to its southern neighbor, hitting a record 2.2 million barrels a day last year as its share of the U.S. market grew by 12 percent.
Energy expert Robert Rapier says the take-away for Americans may be "marry a Canadian," because he or she will be a citizen of an increasingly rich country. "Their budget looks good, and they're sitting on top of tremendous reserves," he says.
Saudi Arabia is a distant second, providing the U.S. with barely half as much crude as Canada. Other Persian Gulf countries also contribute to U.S. oil imports, but make up a relatively small share overall.
"People have tended to exaggerate how much oil we imported from the Middle East," says John Duffield, an energy expert and professor of political science at Georgia State University.
"In the long term, it may look like a historical anomaly that the U.S. became so involved in the Persian Gulf," he adds.
Producers Become Users
In terms of U.S. imports, Mexico is close behind Saudi Arabia in third place. Mexican imports did fall by more than 4 percent last year, partly because Mexico's oil production has been declining and partly because Mexican consumers are demanding more oil for their own use in an increasingly middle-class country.
It's a familiar story among oil-producing countries: As they become wealthier, they consume more of their own oil, says Rapier.
Although Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is no fan of the United States, his country is still a big contributor to America's oil imports. That's at least partly because the economics of shipping Venezuelan oil across the Caribbean are so much more attractive than hauling it to other markets, such as Europe.
But Venezuela's exports to the United States fell by 5 percent last year, dropping to the lowest level in two decades.
Rapier says that's because Chavez's government has been neglecting its oil sector, "siphoning off money from its own industry and killing the goose that lays the golden egg."
Nigeria suffered an even bigger drop in its exports to the United States, down 22 percent last year from the year before, as oil production was disrupted by civil unrest.
Nigeria's turmoil has received relatively little attention in the U.S. even though that country now provides more oil to the U.S. than any Middle Eastern country except Saudi Arabia.
Does It Matter Where Oil Comes From?
In terms of global oil prices, analysts say the source of the oil isn't all that important.
"Anybody who follows the oil industry will tell you that it doesn't make any difference where the oil comes from," says Keith Crane, an energy expert at RAND Corp.
People have tended to exaggerate how much oil we imported from the Middle East. In the long term, it may look like a historical anomaly that the U.S. became so involved in the Persian Gulf.
- John Duffield, energy expert at Georgia State University
Global oil markets are so intertwined, Crane says, that changes in any one part of the system can trigger effects elsewhere.
He points out that the U.S. has imposed sanctions on Iran and therefore does not import its oil. But "if Iranian oil goes off the [world] market, it still affects the price in the United States," Crane says.
Meanwhile, Iran has had no real problem selling its oil to Asian countries, though tougher sanctions are set to go into place this summer.
Now that the U.S. involvement in Iraq has wound down, Crane says, oil seems to be less of an American security concern.
"Do you need military might to preserve access to oil? I don't think there's a lot of evidence to say that's really important," he says.
Crane argues that many of the biggest security challenges the United States faces today are not directly related to energy. He points to the nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea, and the U.S. war in Afghanistan.
U.S. Is Producing More Oil
Analysts also point out that the U.S. is producing more oil domestically while reducing its dependence on oil in general.
The recent recession and the slow economic recovery have dampened demand for oil products. But "the big story is that the U.S. has really expanded production over the past several years," says Crane, citing the production of oil from shale in North Dakota and other states.
He notes that the country has also become more energy efficient, building cars with better gas mileage and shifting away from oil-based energy.
"Whereas the U.S. has been the biggest consumer of oil products in the world, the role of oil is smaller than it was in the '70s, and even than it was in the '90s," Crane says.
But the U.S. still spends huge sums on oil because the rise in world prices has more than made up for the drop in U.S. imports.
"Five years ago, we were importing 10 million barrels a day, but at $50 a barrel," says Rapier. "Now we're at 8.4 million barrels, but at prices over $100 a barrel."
As a `point of interest'. I think I reacall reading in another thread here that the problem is the REFINING of the oil the USA produces...you are producing more oil, but exporting vast amounts of unrefined crude, and then importing back the refined product? Which seems to me to be totally self-defeating. Better to concentrate on building more refineries to refine your OWN oil? Excuse me if I got that wrong
[This message has been edited by fierofetish (edited 04-14-2012).]
As a `point of interest'. I think I reacall reading in another thread here that the problem is the REFINING of the oil the USA produces...you are producing more oil, but exporting vast amounts of unrefined crude, and then importing back the refined product? Which seems to me to be totally self-defeating. Better to concentrate on building more refineries to refine your OWN oil? Excuse me if I got that wrong
Bureaucracy, hippies, and politics. As far as I know, there hasn't been a new refinery built here in well over 30 years. Too expensive.
IP: Logged
03:46 PM
carnut122 Member
Posts: 9122 From: Waleska, GA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
As a `point of interest'. I think I reacall reading in another thread here that the problem is the REFINING of the oil the USA produces...you are producing more oil, but exporting vast amounts of unrefined crude, and then importing back the refined product? Which seems to me to be totally self-defeating. Better to concentrate on building more refineries to refine your OWN oil? Excuse me if I got that wrong
Actually, I'm pretty sure you have that backwards. The export of refined petroleum had huge increases.
"In the long term, it may look like a historical anomaly that the U.S. became so involved in the Persian Gulf," he adds.
Oh come on, no one actually beleives that non-sense about war for oil. Only brain dead parrots ever thought that was true. It was about national security, protection of Isreal, and limiting nuclear proliferation. Look how much 9/11 cost us. And that was ONE event. America can not afford those sort of catastrophies from an economic standpoint let alone a human one.
IP: Logged
06:04 PM
Apr 15th, 2012
cliffw Member
Posts: 36008 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by fierofetish: ... that the problem is the REFINING of the oil the USA produces...you are producing more oil, but exporting vast amounts of unrefined crude, and then importing back the refined product?
I haven't looked at your source link but, that's impossible. The US EPA (environmental protection agency) would not allow it just as our FDA (food and drug administration) will no allow us to buy foreign pharmesuetical drugs.
IP: Logged
09:18 AM
PFF
System Bot
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by Pyrthian: "America" DOES NOT GET OIL. the oil companies do. and Shell Oil gets oil from Iran. and many other places. but - nice try.
FAIL ! What does Shell Oil do with that oil ? Sell it to America, . Glad to see you back. Hope everything is okay.
IP: Logged
11:23 AM
2.5 Member
Posts: 43225 From: Southern MN Registered: May 2007
If Obama had his way, he wouldn't be getting any oil from Canada, but rather from his muslim buddies in the middle east or his socialist pals in Veneuzela and the like. As a closet communist, I don't think it is the "dirty" nature of oil sands that irks Obama so much, but rather that it is coming from a pro capitilist, conservative led country which to him is bigger threat to his plans than any terrorist organization.
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 04-16-2012).]
JUST THIS AM…. I sent out this…. TO REVIEW….Few people realize this but several major oil companies, including Sunoco, Hess Corp, Valero and ConocoPhillips -- just to name a few -- are planning to close, idle or otherwise shut down refineries on the east coast.
That would remove 51% of U.S. East Coast refinery capacity from the equation by some accounts. This means that delivering fuel into the northeast corridor's airports is going to become especially problematic and more expensive.
Why is this? Because Obama has run the regulations thru the EPA thru the roof costing these companies to shutter their business. NOW why would he do that… first step to take a country FROM CAPITALISM TO COMMUNISM…
LIMIT AND SHUT DOWN THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE COUNTRY!! HELLO!!! Here it is out of his mouth…..www.youtube.com/watch?v=5M1WlV7vafk&feature=related and here www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4 . This is NOT A PROPHET …this is someone who is
Orchestrating our collapse, implementing Agenda 21 (energy access and consumption to be reduced by the US by 75% by 2050) and implementing a COMMUNIST REGIME!
NOW we have POWER PLANTS CLOSING…. Again, this is not “OOPSY DAISY WHAT HAPPENED HERE” this is by design, planned and implemented!!! See below!!
It was Friday the 13. If you are superstitious, then the new Executive Order issued yesterday, “Supporting Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources” must give you pause.
The order states, “While natural gas production is carried out by private firms, and States are the primary regulators of onshore oil and gas activities, the Federal Government has an important role to play by regulating oil and gas activities on public and Indian trust lands, encouraging greater use of natural gas in transportation, supporting research and development aimed at improving the safety of natural gas development and transportation activities, and setting sensible, cost-effective public health and environmental standards to implement Federal law and augment State safeguards.”
Because natural gas produced 25 percent of our energy in 2011, the federal government must control this source of energy in order to deliver on the promise of making gasoline prices rise to $10 per gallon, bankrupt the coal industry, and cause energy prices to skyrocket.
An interagency working group is tasked to “facilitate coordinated Administration policy efforts to support safe and responsible unconventional domestic natural gas development.” This working group bureaucracy will be chaired by the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and has several curious members that have no direct involvement with natural gas production: the Department of Defense the Department of the Interior the Department of Agriculture the Department of Commerce the Department of Health and Human Services the Department of Transportation the Department of Energy the Department of Homeland Security the Environmental Protection Agency the Council on Environmental Quality the Office of Science and Technology Policy the Office of Management and Budget the National Economic Council
The Chair may invite other agencies or offices to participate in the working group. The working group will “support [read control] the safe and responsible production of domestic unconventional natural gas by performing the following functions: coordinate agency policy activities, share scientific, environmental, technical and economic information, coordination with federal government in long-term planning, and “consult with other agencies as appropriate.”
The White House Blog explains this new bureaucracy as a step in eliminating “redundancy.” What is there redundant about each state controlling and exploring their natural gas? The federal government is concerned, since natural gas volumetric exploration in 2011 was so large, it eclipsed the all-time high production record of 1973, it must “ensure that we can successfully tap this critical resource for decades to come, we must develop it safely and responsibly.” Translation, we must control it and reduce its production so that our air and water are safe according to the EPA dictates. This is interesting because natural gas is one of the cleanest sources of energy.
The White House Blog continues, “At the same time, as the administration develops a framework for safe and responsible production that builds on steps already taken by states across the country, we must ensure that those efforts continue to happen in a coordinated way.”
There we have it; we cannot let states continue business as usual. We must interfere and impose federal power and control over the states. We cannot let cheap natural gas interfere with our plan for expensive alternative sources of energy. Fossil fuels and fracking are tampering with our power grab plans.
.
