06/10/2009 - 17:00h Burtynsky: Oil

burtynsky_alberta_oil
Edward Burtynsky,
Alberta Oil Sands #6, Fort McMurray, Alberta, 2007
© Edward Burtynsky, cortesia Nicholas Metivier Gallery, Canadá


Ao longo das últimas duas décadas, o fotógrafo canadiano Edward Burtynsky tem-nos mostrado alguns exemplos das enormes transformações que os mais de dois séculos de industrialização provocaram e continuam a provocar neste globo em que vivemos. Em 2003, depois de muitos anos a fotografar com os pés assentes na terra, Burtynsky, que trabalhou na indústria pesada e em minas de ouro no Canadá antes de se dedicar tempo inteiro à fotografia, começou a alugar helicópteros para captar perspectivas que fugissem aos limites físicos da sua posição e lhe dessem novas linguagens visuais para moldar o seu trabalho. Quando tiradas do ar, as imagens de Burtynsky ganham vastidão e horizontes mais longínquos, mas nunca a uma escala em que se deixa de ter a mínima percepção do que se está a ver – o fotógrafo esteve longe, mas não demasiado longe. Apenas longe o suficiente para nos dar um dos aspectos que mais lhe parece interessar – o contexto. O contexto terrivelmente belo dos golpes que não temos parado de dar à natureza.

Em Oil, a nova exposição que pode ser vista em três galerias, duas americanas e uma canadiana (Nicholas Metivier Gallery, Hasted Hunt Kraeutler, Adamson Gallery), Edward Burtynsky reúne um conjunto de imagens captadas durante a última década relativas ao tema do petróleo, onde aparecem refinarias, parques industriais de carros, auto-estradas e poços. São também mostradas novas imagens de transportes, dos campos de Alberta e dos campos abandonados do Azerbeijão. A exposição é itinerante e, para já, na Europa poderá ser vista a partir de Dezembro na Torch Gallery de Amesterdão. A editora Steidl acaba de publicar o livro Burtynsky: Oil com ensaios de Paul Roth, Michael Mitchell, e William E. Rees.

() When the world takes on a surreal, dream-like apperence I stop, and I am compelled to make pictures in those moments. Using the helicopter as a tool, a lofty tripod, I found the strange, dizzying perspective on the landscape provided the new element I was after. The rare bird`s-eye vantage point provides for a view that incorporates the grand scale of what human intervention on our planet quite literally looks like with my desire to transcend that reality and create a work of art.

Edward Burtynsky

Burtynsky

16/03/2009 - 17:11h Porque Obama deveria apostar no Brasil

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/contributors/robert-amsterdam/headshot.jpg

Robert Amsterdam
The Huffington Post

Why Obama Should Bet on Brazil

Despite the well worn campaign slogan, so far Washington’s new foreign policy under President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seems to embody a blend of both continuity and change, depending on the situation. By and large we have seen a reactionary series of policies, as the new president has been thrust into a game with the cards already dealt. However, with the visit to Washington on Saturday March 14 of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva — the first Latin American head of state to be received by Obama at the White House — a fresh hand is being dealt, giving the president a chance to define his administration and mark a clear departure from the policies of the past.

For years Latin America has been waiting for its day in the sun as a privileged partner of the United States; to be treated fairly, with respect, and joined in action toward the fulfillment of mutual goals for the Western Hemisphere. With the visit of Brazil, now graduated to the status of a true regional and global power, the administration should seek to support and enhance its role of responsibility, proving to the skeptics that we don’t need or want a unipolar hemisphere, but rather a multi-lateral and institutional framework for stable and prosperous relations.

There are many compelling reasons for Obama to seek a close relationship with Brazil and establish a new partnership, one that would bring immediate benefits to both parties (while carrying very low risk and political costs). Despite being diplomatically stretched thin by Mideast conflicts, Brazil is a sure bet that Obama should not pass up.

The first reward of a new partnership with Brazil would be felt in terms of regional security. This South American nation of 196 million citizens is enjoying the benefits of four consecutive successful democratic governments, making it one of the top BRIC economies with a decade of growth and strong forecasts for the future, despite suffering the current woes of the crisis along with everyone else. The economic growth has been matched by proactive diplomacy, as Brazil has grown into a much stronger regional leadership role over the past 10 years.

In terms of military and defense matters, they are an essential player, having just overseen the historic first meeting of the NATO-like South American Defense Council of UNASUR (Union of South American Nations). When incidents arise between Latin American countries, such as the recent Colombia-Ecuador conflict, it is Brasilia, not Washington or the OAS, that is called in first as the trusted mediator.

The second imperative for Obama to give the Brazilians a red carpet welcome is economic. Amid the uncertain breakdown of global financial institutions, where governments find themselves learning how to be bankers, Brazil is ironically ahead of the curve. As noted by a recent article in the Economist, analysts such as Goldman Sachs have praised Brazil’s state involvement in the banking sector, which combined with lower public sector debt and responsible fiscal policy has prepared the country for a better survival than most. Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive at Pimco, has even been quoted by Reuters as saying that China and Brazil offer better stock investments for the future than the United States: “The case for optimism comes from the fact that these countries entered today’s global crisis with better initial conditions.”

In terms of trade, the partnership is a natural fit with room to grow. The United States imports the most from Brazil and exports the most (about 15.7% and 16.1% respectively for 2007). Furthermore, if the Obama administration has any hopes of beating back a worldwide return to protectionism, Brazil’s cooperation is essential. According to a new report from the Inter-American Dialogue, Brazil is now one of the most influential participants in the Doha talks and shares many U.S. objectives: “By eliminating critical stumbling blocks that have frustrated regional negotiations, a breakthrough in Doha on agriculture could facilitate U.S.-Brazilian bilateral trade discussions and perhaps set the stage for reviving hemispheric trade talks.”

Energy and climate cooperation could also revolutionize the U.S.-Brazil relationship, however I am not confident that the Obama administration has the political will at this juncture to recognize that Brazil is the solution to energy independence — at the cost of cutting tariffs and U.S. farm subsidies for ethanol. It is notable that Brazil is in the position of lecturing the United States on protectionism, and it would be a helpful first step for Obama to show that he is listening.

Nevertheless, if the security, economic, and trade benefits of this relationship were not motivation enough, there is also the fact that Lula is ideally positioned to help Obama handle the most challenging and dangerous threat to the hemisphere: President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. After more than a decade in power and several constitutional revisions to consolidate power and weaken democratic and legal institutions, developments in Venezuela are rapidly worsening. Private property seizures are accelerating (not just oil, but food companies), crackdowns against the opposition and media are intensifying, the state increasingly tolerates violent attacks against the student movements and the Jewish community, and President Chavez is holding a growing number of political prisoners beyond the reach of law (disclosure: I represent one such political prisoner, Eligio Cedeño).

We need to understand that Chavez is neither a dictator nor a model democrat, and any effort to improve the situation cannot be carried out alone. As Chavez has already empowered Lula to serve as an interlocutor to Washington, Brazil has the opportunity to become the most effective and pragmatic voice to speak to the Chavez government, helping to reign in the more destructive trends, if not subtly assisting the U.S. effort to isolate the world’s foremost petrocrat (though friendly with Chavez, the Brazilians aren’t thrilled about $6 billion in Russian arms coming into the region). Dealing with the regional problems presented by Venezuela is not about punishing Chavez or causing collateral damage to its citizens, but rather seeking engagement with Bolivia, opening the door to the new government in Cuba, and encouraging economic initiatives from Central America to the Andes. If Washington is able to run from the same playbook as Brasilia, Chavez will have a much more difficult time dismissing these efforts to promote stability and democracy as a malicious neoliberal agenda.

Lastly, there is an important synergy to the social context and visionary ambition of these two presidents. When Lula first became president in 2003, there were wild accusations and pessimistic predictions of the damage his “socialist” leanings would bring to the economy, a tone of criticism that is mimicked in the United States today.

For what it is worth, like Obama, Lula has risen to the country’s highest office from very humble origins, riding a narrative of hope, possibility, and the sudden sense of enfranchisement of politically excluded groups. Overcoming the odds to reach the presidency, both Lula and Obama have sought to conquer fears of radicalism with measured pragmatism. Lula has successfully surrounded himself with capable advisors able to maintain good relations with countries as different as Venezuela and the United States, such as Minister of Strategic Affairs, Roberto Mangabeira Unger, who upon observing Chavez’s attempt to use Moscow as a lever against the United States, told the New York Times “Unlike other South American countries we don’t go around buying things, and we are not interested in some kind of balance-of-power politics to contain the United States.”

So far the Brazilian strategic approach has been successful and constructive, and one that the United States should want to see replicated across the region. Among the young democracies of Latin America and beyond, two alternatives are currently on offer — the traditional, lackluster offer from the United States, and the alternative coalition led by authoritarian petroleum exporters (Russia, Venezuela, Iran, and others), united mainly by anti-Americanism, and vaguely pursuing some form of non-institutional multilateralism. It should be no surprise that the latter is winning over many converts, especially in light of the fact that Venezuela is pouring three times the amount of aid into the region than the United States, whose paltry contributions to humanitarian projects outside of the war on drugs is negligible.

The time is now for Obama to launch a new partnership with Latin America’s biggest and best democracy, and for once in history make the region a top priority for U.S. foreign policy. Unlike dealing with Moscow over Iran or meting out carrots and sticks in the Mid-East, with Brazil efforts are much more likely to be met with a serious and genuine response to achieve progress. It is certainly a bet worth taking.

16/09/2008 - 10:30h Petrobrás contrata 10 plataformas para pré-sal

plataforma_construindo.jpg

Equipamentos chegarão ao País entre 2013 e 2014 para testes

Kelly Lima, Gustavo Porto, Mônica Ciarelli, Nicola Pamplona – O Estado de São Paulo

A Petrobrás anunciou ontem a contratação de dez novas plataformas para a área do pré-sal da Bacia de Santos, conforme antecipou o Estado na quinta-feira. As duas primeiras, que serão afretadas, chegam ao Brasil entre 2013 e 2014 para testes de produção, provavelmente nas áreas de Guará e Iara. Segundo o presidente da companhia, José Sérgio Gabrielli, o Brasil enfrentará “enormes desafios” após as descobertas no pré-sal.

“As descobertas são gigantescas e os desafios, idem”, disse. Ele citou o potencial de 8 bilhões a 12 bilhões de barris de petróleo recuperáveis nos blocos de Tupi e de Iara. “Para cada sistema produtivo (plataforma e equipamentos de apoio) serão necessários investimentos de US$ 7 bilhões; e são muitos sistemas, não sabemos ainda quantos, podem chegar a 60.”

O diretor-financeiro da Petrobrás, Almir Barbassa, informou que o governo estuda um programa de isenção de impostos para incentivar a produção nacional dos equipamentos. Em maio, no lançamento da nova política industrial, o governo reduziu os impostos sobre a construção de navios e plataformas de exploração de petróleo.

Barbassa lembra que, na época, quando o governo lançou o incentivo fiscal, não havia produção de sondas no Brasil. “Agora existe uma demanda muito grande; serão 28 sondas construídas até 2017″, afirmou.

Após a abertura, ontem, da feira Rio Oil & Gas, Gabrielli comentou que a próxima área a ter a estimativa de volume anunciada será Júpiter, que tem potencial de gás natural. Até agora, a companhia divulgou projeções apenas para Tupi e Iara. Somados, os dois campos têm volume quase equivalente aos 16 bilhões de barris descobertos até hoje no pré-sal da porção americana do Golfo do México, segundo informações do vice-presidente da Chevron, Stephen Thurston.

O bloco de Tupi começa a ser testado no ano que vem e receberá um projeto piloto em 2010, com capacidade para 100 mil barris por dia. Os dois novos sistemas-piloto anunciados ontem, com capacidade semelhante, só começam a produzir em meados da próxima década. “Com esses projetos, vamos definir os melhores sistemas de produção para a região”, disse o gerente-executivo de Exploração e Produção da companhia, Francisco Nepomuceno.

Segundo ele, o modelo será diferente do adotado na Bacia de Campos. No pacote anunciado ontem, há oito navios-plataforma com capacidade para produzir 120 mil barris por dia. Mas, segundo Nepomuceno, uma das idéias em estudo prevê a substituição de plataformas convencionais por depósitos de petróleo e gás em cavernas na camada de sal. “A plataforma serve para armazenar petróleo, mas tem 2 mil metros de sal lá que podem desempenhar essa função.”

O gerente-executivo de Pré-Sal da Petrobrás, José Formigli Filho, disse que a Petrobrás vai lançar em outubro a licitação para dez navios-plataforma para a área do pré-sal na Bacia de Santos. Segundo ele, oito delas serão construídas no estaleiro Rio Grande, no Sul do País.

Considerando a encomenda dos oito sistemas de produção com capacidade para 120 mil barris, a Petrobrás gastaria em torno de US$ 50 bilhões nessa primeira fase de produção. Essas unidades serão instaladas entre 2015 e 2016.

Também no evento, o diretor-financeiro da Shell, Peter Voser, informou que o Brasil é “peça-chave no portfólio” da companhia e a empresa vai perfurar dez poços exploratórios no País nos próximos dois anos, alguns deles abaixo da camada de sal. A companhia produz no pré-sal desde o fim da década de 50 na Holanda.

O executivo disse que a companhia vem trabalhando em um modelo de liquefação de gás em plataformas, esquema que vem sendo estudado pela estatal para os campos da Bacia de Santos mais distantes do continente. “Esperamos ter, até o fim do ano, um desenho mais detalhado do projeto.”

29/04/2008 - 09:07h FT Interview: Celso Amorim, Brazil’s foreign minister

celsoamorim.jpg

By Jonathan Wheatley and Richard Lapper, FT.com site

Published: Feb 21, 2007

Jonathan Wheatley and Richard Lapper, speak to Brazil’s foreign minister Celso Amorim who insists Brazil is not about to adopt 21st century socialism.

(mais…)

18/04/2008 - 06:07h Petróleo e Gás: Mudanças trazem indefinição para investidor

plataforma_petroleo4.jpg

Cláudia Schüffner – VALOR

A descoberta do campo de Tupi e os indícios da existência de uma imensa província petrolífera no pré-sal em um momento de disparada dos preços do petróleo já deixaram uma certeza para os agentes do setor de petróleo e gás: a regulação vai mudar para aumentar a taxação. O que ainda não está claro é a profundidade das mudanças e o impacto que ela trará para investidores estrangeiros.

Se a mudança for apenas para permitir maior participação do país no lucro da indústria, ela pode ser feita por meio de mudanças na alíquota da Participação Especial (PE), o que não precisa alterar a Lei do Petróleo (9.478/97). Porém, mudanças mais amplas, que envolvam nova repartição dos royalties ou mesmo alteração dessa alíquota terão de ser levadas ao Congresso. Se isso acontecer, a discussão pode levar anos, sem que se possa garantir o resultado final de uma lei substituta da atual.

“A lei atual é boa e alterá-la vai parar o setor, o que é ruim para o país. É muito fácil aumentar a renda auferida pela nação em decorrência da exploração de petróleo sem mudar a lei. Na minha opinião, nesses casos a gente conhece o projeto que entra, mas não como ele vai sair na forma de lei. E ninguém fica mais inteligente sentado em um barril de petróleo, mas podem estudar mais se o governo tiver mais recursos para a educação”, diz o primeiro diretor-geral da ANP, David Zylbersztajn.

Mesma opinião tem Álvaro Teixeira, secretário-executivo do Instituto Brasileiro do Petróleo (IBP). “O atual sistema de concessão tem todos os mecanismos para capturar os lucros extraordinários decorrentes do aumento de preço do petróleo ou por causa do tamanho das jazidas. E pode proporcionar ao governo uma participação adequada na renda petroleira”, diz.

Oficialmente, caberá à Agência Nacional do Petróleo (ANP) formular propostas para uma nova regulamentação para o pré-sal, que será encaminhada ao Ministério de Minas e Energia (MME), que levará o assunto ao Conselho Nacional de Política Energética (CNPE). A agência está elaborando um documento com sugestões sobre o tema, que deverá ficar pronto em maio. Técnicos da autarquia já esmiuçaram os vários modelos de contrato existentes no mundo, detalhando vantagens e desvantagens dos contratos de concessão (utilizado hoje no Brasil), os de partilha de produção (adotado na Nigéria e outros países em desenvolvimento) e os de prestação de serviços (México e Irã). Mas ainda não se sabe o que vai prevalecer depois que o assunto for levado à diretoria colegiada da agência.

Uma ala da Petrobras estaria defendendo o fechamento das áreas do pré-sal ainda sem concessão para investidores estrangeiros. De qualquer modo, a Petrobras de hoje não pode ser considerada uma estatal puro-sangue já que 60% do seu capital está nas mãos de investidores privados, a maioria estrangeiros, e por isso se fala na possibilidade de criação de outra estatal que teria o controle da produção nas áreas mais ricas do pré-sal.

A alegação é de que somente uma empresa genuinamente brasileira poderia devolver ao governo e ao país todos os ganhos capturados pela exploração dessa riqueza natural do país. Não será surpresa se estiver em gestação uma nova campanha do tipo “O Petróleo é Nosso”.

A discussão não é nova no mundo e preocupa as empresas porque atualmente elas estão sem acesso a novas reservas, enquanto cresce o controle de estatais sobre as áreas existentes. É o que ocorre, por exemplo, na Arábia Saudita, Irã, Líbia, Kuwait e Venezuela.

Independentemente do aumento da carga tributária, a indústria não tem dúvidas de que o preço de produzir no Brasil será maior. E agora tenta convencer o governo a mudar apenas a tributação, sem alterar a Lei do Petróleo.

Antes de se ver envolvido no turbilhão de críticas esta semana, o diretor-geral da ANP, Haroldo Lima vinha defendendo em público a manutenção da atual legislação sugerindo que achava mais razoável uma alteração, por decreto presidencial, do percentual de impostos cobrados sobre os campos localizados no pré-sal. O presidente da Petrobras, José Sergio Gabrielli, discorda. Ele acha que deveria ser levada ao Congresso proposta de se adotar nova regra para o pré-sal, sem excluir a partilha da produção ou a prestação de serviços. Para Gabrielli, essas áreas deveriam ter um regime diferente do atual devido ao baixo risco exploratório.

Álvaro Teixeira diz que a partilha de produção foi um mecanismo que as empresas vislumbraram para não ficar sujeitas a mudanças tributárias em países onde essa área é pouco organizada e justo na fase de desenvolvimento dos projetos. A seu ver, esse não é o caso do Brasil. “A partilha não é ruim. Mas adotar esse sistema agora significaria desconstruir uma regulamentação que já está madura e tem anos anos de prática. O que se diz também é que através da partilha o governo tem mais controle sobre o ritmo de produção, mas hoje todos os mecanismos para isso já existem, seja por meio dos bônus, que refletem o risco, seja através da PE, que captura o risco extraordinário”, afirma.

A discussão não é trivial e já movimenta os partidos políticos. O deputado federal Luiz Paulo Vellozo Lucas (PSDB-ES), presidente do Instituto Teotônio Vilella, organismo de estudos políticos do PSDB, promove hoje no Rio um seminário para discutir justamente a regulação do setor de petróleo e gás depois da descoberta de Tupi. “Sou a favor de mudar a PE sem mudar a lei. O atual regime de concessão do país é o mais transparente e o que melhor remunera o setor público”, diz o deputado.

O IBP ainda não tem posição sobre a possibilidade de mudanças mais amplas na lei. Dada a seriedade do tema e os impactos para as 20 empresas associadas, elas precisam se reunir para chegar a um consenso. Ali, a situação de algumas multinacionais não é tão confortável como a das que têm concessões na faixa do pré-sal, como é o caso da Repsol, BG, Chevron, Exxon, Hess e as portuguesas Galp e Petrogal. No artigo da “World Oil” mencionado por Haroldo Lima, o editor Arthur Berman encerra assim as três páginas de comentários: “A verdadeira mensagem trazida por essas descobertas é que não devemos perder de vista o ainda desconhecido, mas possivelmente grande potencial de bacias que, freqüentemente, são domínio exclusivo de petrolíferas estatais.”

18/04/2008 - 05:55h The Economist sobre Brasil: “Uma potência econômica, e agora também petrolífera”

An economic superpower, and now oil too

From The Economist print edition

Oil could transform Brazil’s economy. But not necessarily for the better

 THE legend is that Brazil never lives up to its vast potential. When Stefan Zweig, an exiled Austrian writer, said in 1941 of his new home that it was the “country of the future”, popular humour quickly added the rider “and it always will be”. More recently, when Goldman Sachs bracketed Brazil with Russia, India and China as the “BRIC” countries that collectively represent the world’s economic future, there was much muttering that its mediocre rate of economic growth condemned it to be an interloper in such dynamic company.

Yet there are reasons to believe that South America’s economic powerhouse of 190m people is starting to count in the world. Economic growth has risen steadily, to 5.4% last year. That is modest by Chinese standards—but the comparison is misleading. Brazil enjoyed Chinese rates of growth in the third quarter of the 20th century. That was when it was almost as poor as China. It is much harder for a middle-income country, as Brazil now is, to grow at such rates. And now it looks as if Brazil will become an oil power, too (see article).

Brazil’s previous growth spurt was derailed by debt and high oil prices, a debacle that obliged its then military government to give way to civilian rule. The early years of restored democracy saw chronic inflation, economic torpor and political drift. In the past decade and a half, however, under reforming democratic governments, Brazil has conquered inflation, opened a protected economy to the world and begun to tackle its social problems. Poverty and inequality are falling steadily. Under President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the left came to power in 2002 and, to the surprise of some, maintained its commitment to economic stability and openness.

All this has gradually created a new mood among business people. Brazilian companies, traditionally inward-looking family-owned affairs, are going to the stockmarket to raise funds, in many cases to finance expansion abroad. Some, such as Vale, the world’s second-biggest mining company, and Embraer, its third-largest maker of civilian aircraft, both privatised in the 1990s, are well-known. A string of others are about to become so. Outsiders have caught the mood: foreign direct investment reached a record $34.6 billion last year.
Beware of bonanzas

Many of these companies are linked to agribusiness or other primary commodities. One reason to worry that Brazil is again flattering only to deceive is that it has been a huge beneficiary of high commodity prices—that same trend that is pushing up the cost of food around the world. Strip out this cyclical stimulus and the country’s performance would look less sprightly. But some economists argue that Brazil is the beneficiary of a structural shift, in which the industrialisation of Asia and the rise of a new middle class in the developing world will keep commodity prices high. Besides, Brazil produces more than just soyabeans. It has a lot of manufacturing industry too. And its newly discovered offshore fields of oil and natural gas may turn out to be bigger than those in the North Sea in the 1960s.

Oil wealth is lovely, of course. But it is also a cause for concern. Brazil’s currency, the real, has already soared to levels that make manufacturers wince. If it becomes a petro-currency, many factories will be forced to close unless the needlessly high costs of doing business in Brazil are slashed. Moreover, the most impressive economic achievements of Brazil as a democracy have tended to come when the government has had little room to manoeuvre.

The worry now is that a bonanza of oil will weaken an already infirm resolve to drill deeper into the economy’s structural problems. These difficulties include an oppressive tax system and a labour code that makes firms wary of hiring. Between them these have confined some 40% of the workforce to the informal economy. Though he needs to spend much more on infrastructure, Lula has squandered a chunk of record tax revenues on padding the public payroll.

An oil gusher could also sharpen Brazil’s already voracious appetite for the politics of the pork barrel. Lula has done much to make Brazil’s democracy more genuine. But he was re-elected in 2006 despite a corruption scandal that would have felled a politician of lesser skills. Since then he has basked in popularity derived from sunny economic times and well-designed social policies. The danger is complacency. Compared with its past, Brazil is indeed doing much better. But before oil euphoria kicks in, Brazil’s leaders should ask themselves why so many other countries have made bigger returns from a much smaller natural endowment.

16/04/2008 - 15:36h Oil and Brazil: What lies beneath

From Economist.com

Is there really an ocean of oil off Brazil?

Shutterstock

JUST how much oil is there off the coast of Brazil? Until recently, Brazil’s oil reserves were thought to be relatively modest: about 12 billion barrels at the beginning of 2007, according to BP, or about 1% of the world’s total. But last year, Petrobras, Brazil’s partly state-owned oil firm, announced the world’s biggest oil discovery since 2000: the Tupi field, which it hopes will produce between 5 billion and 8 billion barrels. Now the head of Brazil’s National Petroleum Agency (ANP) says another nearby discovery might hold as much as 33 billion barrels, which would make it the third-largest field ever found. That alone would be enough to raise Brazil to eighth position in the global oil rankings—and there is talk of further big discoveries. But the peculiar way in which the information came to light is casting doubt on its significance.

The ANP, which regulates the oil industry in Brazil, was quick to distance itself from the remarks of its boss, Haroldo Lima. His comments were of a personal nature, it said, and were based on past reports in the media. It helpfully cited an article from a magazine, World Oil, that had mentioned the magic figure of 33 billion barrels in February. Petrobras and its partners in the field, BG of Britain and Repsol-YPF of Spain, said that they had not yet done enough tests to determine exactly how much oil it contained.

But no one dismissed the estimate as preposterous. That, plus the fact that a senior official had given any credence to such a dramatic number, caused the share prices of the three firms to jump, despite the fact that Mr Lima claims he does not even know where the stockmarket is, and certainly did not intend to influence it. At one point Repsol’s was up by 14%. The shares of Hess, an American firm which is part of a consortium looking for oil nearby, posted their biggest gain since 1981.

Both Tupi and the field mentioned by Mr Lima, Carioca-Sugar Loaf, lie far below the seabed, beneath a thick layer of salt that is some 800km long and 200km wide. José Sérgio Gabrielli, Petrobras’s boss, has hinted that there are vast reserves of oil to be found in this “pre-salt” formation. At any rate, Petrobras has struck oil every time it has drilled there. It is currently assessing the reserves of yet another nearby discovery, Jupiter, which appears to be very similar in scale to Tupi. The firm’s head of exploration says “there is practically no exploratory risk” in the area. While this does not necessarily transform Brazil into an oil power on a par with Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, as Dilma Rousseff, the chairman of Petrobras’s board and chief of staff to Brazil’s president, has excitedly proclaimed, it suggests that the volumes of oil involved are very big.

Nonetheless, the immediate impact of the “pre-salt” discoveries will be small. It will be several years at least before any of the new oil comes to market. What is more, it will be expensive to produce. The fields are all far out at sea, deep under ground that is itself far below sea level. Simply drilling the first test well at Tupi cost $240m, and costs are likely to rise, thanks to fierce inflation throughout the oil industry. As if to underscore the point, the oil price hit a new record, of $114.41 a barrel, a couple of days after Mr Lima dropped his bombshell.

Even if there is an ocean of oil off Brazil’s coast, it will not necessarily be of much benefit to big oil firms, which have struggled to gain access to promising territory for exploration of late, thanks to growing nationalism in oil-rich countries. Brazil had been a heartening exception. But after Petrobras announced the discovery at Tupi, the ANP cancelled a planned auction of rights to explore for oil in several adjacent areas. Mr Gabrielli, the boss of Petrobras, says that the state’s relatively low share of the revenues from oil production in Brazil should be increased to reflect the decreasing risks and increasing profitability of exploration.

The discoveries do suggest that the gloomiest pundits are wrong to predict that the world will soon run out of oil. It is not that there are still lots of huge oil fields out there: the number of mammoth discoveries is declining, Tupi (and perhaps Carioca-Sugar Loaf and Jupiter) notwithstanding. But the new finds do illustrate how the technology with which oil firms hunt for, extract and process fossil fuels is constantly improving. Petrobras’s recent success is only possible thanks to recent advancements in seismic surveys, drilling, and offshore platforms. Other technological developments are allowing a greater proportion of the oil found around the world to be recovered and are even expanding the definition of oil, as firms conjure liquid fuel from the solid tar-sands of Canada, for example, or from coal and natural gas. Indeed, among the shares that rose in the wake of Mr Lima’s comments were those of the firms that supply Petrobras with all its clever kit.

16/04/2008 - 09:23h A mídia no poço de petróleo

L'image “http://www.estadao.com.br/fotos/petroleo.jpg” ne peut être affichée car elle contient des erreurs.

Confesso que não percebo a lógica de alguns jornalistas. Uma autoridade do governo diz que é possível que o Brasil tenha reservas de petróleo gigantescas e que as reservas do “Carioca”, na Bacia de Santos, podem ser cinco vezes maiores que as do Tupi, tudo isto a confirmar e verificar. Os jornais transformam está declaração em um furo, sem checar se existe alguma novidade nesta declaração, e as bolsas se entusiasmam com o “furo” jornalístico, isto prova que o governo nomeia pessoas incompetentes?

Leiam a nota de Dora Kramer hoje e a seguir o artigo da Folha, também de hoje. Tudo confirma que nenhum segredo foi violado, nenhuma declaração foi além do que já tinha sido dito e publicado e os investidores não foram enganados com nenhuma informação manipulada.

Mas jornais e rádios continuam atacando o governo e dando destaque ao que não tem importância.

Leiam e julguem vocês mesmos. LF

Erro de pessoa

Dora Kramer

“O ex-deputado Haroldo Lima, hoje diretor-geral da Agência Nacional de Petróleo, certamente não se precipitou sobre descobertas da Petrobrás por má-fé.

Como político, agiu conforme a lógica de uma atividade que utiliza a versão sem preocupação rigorosa com fato consumado.

Isso não o absolve do erro crasso. Ao contrário, amplia a culpa do dano aos responsáveis por sua nomeação.

Evidencia a inadequação das indicações políticas para cargos que exigem formação, conhecimento e treino sobre os códigos e mecânica do setor. Quem não tem intimidade com o que faz nem dispõe da visão completa sobre como se faz, em algum momento faz bobagem.”

Dados circulam desde o final de 2007

DA SUCURSAL DO RIO – FOLHA DE SÃO PAULO

As informações sobre o potencial da área de exploração conhecida como Carioca (bloco BM-S-9) circulam entre analistas do setor, consultores e publicações estrangeiras desde o fim do ano passado.
A própria ANP, em nota, afirmou que a informação sobre o potencial do campo Carioca já havia sido publicada na coluna “What’s New in Exploration”, na edição de fevereiro da revista “World Oil” -uma publicação especializada sediada em Houston, no Texas.
No texto, o jornalista Arthur Berman relata a descoberta de três campos gigantes no litoral brasileiro, Tupi, Júpiter e Carioca: “Se os relatos sobre o tamanho potencial da estrutura de Carioca/Pão-de-Açúcar se mostrarem corretos, com a estimativa de 33 bilhões de barris de óleo (a média entre 25 bilhões e 40 bilhões de barris), e as reservas estimadas de Tupi e Júpiter forem precisas, em 6,5 bilhões de barris cada uma (a média entre 5 bilhões e 8 bilhões), o Carioca/Pão-de-Açúcar seria o terceiro maior campo de óleo do mundo”.
Antes, no dia 17 de dezembro, o site norte-americano “Next Energy News” relatou que a Petrobras havia descoberto o maior campo de petróleo dos últimos 30 anos, com potencial cinco vezes maior do que o verificado em Tupi. A publicação credita a funcionários da estatal brasileira a informação de que o campo Pão-de-Açúcar poderá produzir até 40 bilhões de barris de petróleo.
Também em dezembro, no dia 11, a agência de notícias especializada em negócios “Business News Americas” relatou a existência de duas áreas de exploração na bacia de Santos que poderiam ser maiores do que o campo de Tupi -e credita a informação a um relatório do banco de investimento UBS Pactual, divulgado em dezembro. Além do UBS Pactual, o Crédit Suisse também distribuiu, em novembro, um relatório sobre a Petrobras intitulado “O novo paradigma da exploração”. O texto detalha as principais ações de exploração da estatal em quatro campos do pré-sal: Tupi, Caxaré, Pirambu e Carioca.
Uma das fontes de informação mais utilizadas pelos jornalistas que cobrem o setor nos Estados Unidos são os relatórios da IHS, uma consultoria com sede em Englewood, no Colorado. Ela produz relatórios, artigos e estudos sobre diversas indústrias -da aeroespacial à do petróleo-, cobrindo a atuação de empresas em todo o mundo. Mas muitas dessas informações não estão abertas ao público, são vendidas. Por meio da IHS, é possível acompanhar as atividades de exploração da Petrobras na bacia de Santos, por exemplo. O serviço pode custar até US$ 5.000 por ano. (ROBERTO MACHADO)

15/04/2008 - 12:59h Diretor da ANP diz que tem autoridade para falar

“Nas palavras do mandachuva da ANP, a Petrobras lograra descobrir “o terceiro maior campo do mundo na atualidade.” Definiu assim o achado: “É algo do Oriente Médio.” Na rabeira da frase, adicionou: “Mas nada está confirmado.”

“As “informações oficiosas” do diretor-geral da ANP produziram reflexos instantâneos no mercado. As ações da Petrobras na Bolsa de Valores de São Paulo dispararam. Pela manhã, amargavam perdas de 1,7%. Turbinadas pelo efeito Haroldo Lima, registravam, pouco antes das 17h, altas que variavam de 5,5% (ações preferenciais) a 7,3% (ações ordinárias). A CVM (Comissão de Valores Mobiliários) chiou.”

“A algaravia provocada pelo dirigente da ANP pode ser resumida numa palavra: desastre. Informações como a descoberta de reservas petrolíferas, por relevantes, exigem comunicação meticulosa, submetida a procedimentos rígidos. O episódio evidencia um flagelo governamental: o aparelhamento político das agências reguladoras.” Blog de Josias

Afirmações como as reproduzidas acima mostram o flagelo que assola uma parte da midia e dos jornais no Brasil. A desinformaçao do jornalista, que aparentemente ignorava que a notícia já tinha sido publicada anteriormente, não o empede de apontar o dedo acusador contra o governo. Agora, vejam a informação da agencia Estado. LF

lula_21.GIF

Diretor da ANP rebate as acusações com informação de que ANP não é subordinada à CVM

AGENCIA ESTADO

SÃO PAULO – Em resposta às críticas sobre a forma como foi divulgada a informação sobre o volume de petróleo existente na área conhecida como Pão de Açúcar, na Bacia de Santos, o diretor-geral da Agência Nacional do Petróleo (ANP), Haroldo Lima, disse que tem autoridade para falar sobre o assunto. Rebateu ainda com a afirmação de que é “membro do governo” e não é subordinado à Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM). Ele negou a intenção de especular com a informação. “Ninguém quis especular. Os especuladores é que quiseram especular”, afirmou.

Na segunda-feira, Lima surpreendeu o mercado ao afirmar, em seminário promovido pela Fundação Getúlio Vargas, que a área de exploração de petróleo conhecida como”Pão de Açúcar”, na Bacia de Santos, pode ter até cinco vezes o volume de petróleo do megacampo de Tupi. “Se isso for confirmado, será a maior descoberta já feita, que poderá se transformar no terceiro maior campo de produção de petróleo no mundo”, disse Lima na ocasião, estimando as novas reservas em 33 bilhões de barris.

Nesta terça, Lima voltou a dizer que as informações dadas por ele foram publicadas em fevereiro deste ano, no jornal World Oil, de Houston, dos Estados Unidos. O artigo, assinado por Arthur Erman, intitulado “Tree Super-Giants Feelds Discovery off Shore Brazil”, afirma que, se as notícias sobre o tamanho e potencial do Campo estiverem corretas, sobre a estimativa de 33 bilhões de barris de óleo, esse campo seria o terceiro maior do mundo, com produção cinco vezes maior do que o Campo de Tupy.Segundo Lima, as mesmas informações foram publicadas, também, pelo jornal O Estado de S.Paulo.

Segundo o diretor da ANP, que está no Senado para uma audiência pública na Comissão de Assuntos Econômicos, a publicação americana é pouco lida no Brasil. “O pessoal vinculado à Bolsa de Valores não está interessado nisso. Querem ganhar dinheiro”, afirmou, numa referência à reação no mercado, na segunda, em decorrência de suas declarações. Desempenho das açõesNa segunda-feira, após as divulgações de Lima, as ações da Petrobrás dispararam. Houve um momento em que a empresa, sozinha, respondia por metade do giro de recursos na Bovespa. Os papéis ordinários (ON) chegaram a valorizar-se 10,8% e fecharam o pregão com alta de 7,68%. A direção da estatal, que de início não quis comentar as declarações do diretor da ANP, teve de emitir nota, explicando que “a abrangência das descobertas em Santos ainda depende de estudos”.A empresa comunicou ainda que “um plano de avaliação das áreas deverá ser entregue à ANP dentro de poucos dias”.

Na noite de segunda-feira, diante da repercussão das declarações de Lima, a ANP emitiu uma nota de esclarecimento na qual classificou como” conhecidos” os dados expostos pelo diretor. A ANP remeteu as informações a notas veiculadas pela Agência Estado, em novembro do ano passado, e a uma coluna da revista World Oil.

Na exposição, o diretor da ANP identificou como Pão de Açúcar apenas o bloco BM-S-9 (Bacia Marítima de Santos, nº 9), operado por um consórcio formado pela Petrobrás (45%), a britânica BG(30%) e a hispano-argentina Repsol (25%). Segundo ele, o volume de óleo que é possível extrair da jazida poderia chegar a até 33 bilhões de barris. A megajazida de Tupi tem reservas estimadas de 5 bilhões a 8 bilhões de barrisAs reservas de bilhões de barris de óleo, de qualidade superior à produzida atualmente no País, estão numa profundidade definida como “pré-sal”, ou abaixo da camada de sal que forma blocos no subsolo marítimo. As descobertas estão em áreas próximas, na Bacia de Santos, mas a Petrobrás estima que o mesmo tipo de ambiente pode se repetir por cerca de 800 quilômetros, do Espírito Santo a Santa Catarina, como foi informado na época da descoberta de Tupi. Os primeiros indícios de petróleo e gás na área foram informados à ANP em agosto de 2007, mas sem o volume identificado no local.

16/11/2007 - 14:35h All this and oil too

God may indeed be Brazilian after all

Illustration by Claudio Munoz

From The Economist print edition

WHEN Francisco Suares, a Portuguese explorer, wrote home to his brother in Lisbon about Brazil’s natural bounty in 1596, he declared himself “ashamed to write it, fearing that I shall not be believed.” And so it remains today. Brazil’s forests are bigger than anywhere else’s. Its soil is so fertile that some trees grow to full maturity quicker than people do. Beneath the soil lie huge mineral deposits that are raw material for China’s double-digit growth. Brazil is already on its way to becoming an alternative-energy superpower. And as if to prove a popular saying that “God is Brazilian”, it now seems that there are billions more barrels of oil than previously thought lying beneath deep waters off the country’s coastline.

Just how many billions is unclear, but Petrobras, Brazil’s state-controlled oil company, announced earlier this month that it reckons the Tupi oilfield contains between 5 billion and 8 billion barrels. That may not quite yet put Brazil in the same league as Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, as Dilma Rousseff, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s chief of staff who also chairs Petrobras’s board, excitedly proclaimed. But the higher estimate would make the Tupi field alone equal to all of Norway’s reserves. It contains light crude, which is less expensive to refine and therefore worth more. And there may be other big deposits to be found nearby.

José Sergio Gabrielli, Petrobras’s chief executive, refuses to speculate about how big an oil power Brazil might become. But he does concede that there is the potential for many more discoveries on the scale of Tupi—which itself is the world’s second-biggest strike in 20 years, after Kazakhstan’s 12 billion-barrel Kashagan field, discovered in 2000.

Most of Brazil’s oil comes from the Campos basin, in the waters off Rio de Janeiro. It is typically found at depths of 1,000-2,000 metres below the seabed. Below that lies a huge layer of salt, at some points more than a mile thick. This stretches both north and south to the hitherto less prolific basins of Espirito Santo and Santos. It is below the salt, in the Santos basin, that Petrobras discovered Tupi. The company has also found “sub-salt” oil in Espirito Santo, although it has not yet assessed the scale of this. Mr Gabrielli believes that the two basins have yielded relatively little oil to date not because it is not there, but because it lies deeper underground, below the salt.

Tupi’s oil will be hard to extract. Petrobras is a world leader in deep-water oil production, but Tupi is farther down than any of its existing fields. Drilling through the salt layer and the hard rock beneath brings further technical difficulties. The first test-well alone cost $240m. Moreover, there is a shortage of skilled labour and equipment throughout the oil industry at the moment—although Mr Gabrielli says Petrobras can transfer staff and resources from other projects if necessary.

Despite these caveats, it is reasonable to assume that Brazil’s economy and currency will get a boost when the oil starts flowing, it is hoped, in 2010. The discovery might also tip the balance of power in South America further in Brazil’s favour. Already self-sufficient in oil, Brazil is now likely to become a significant exporter. That may reduce the clout of Venezuela’s oil-rich president, Hugo Chávez, in the region. As if to underline this, Petrobras announced on November 13th that it was pulling out of a joint venture in Venezuela.

Brazil’s drive towards oil self-sufficiency follows the opening up of the industry to foreign investment in the 1990s, when the government also floated some 40% of Petrobras’s shares on the stockmarket. Britain’s BG Group has a 25% stake in the Tupi field, and Portugal’s Galp Energia holds 10%.

The government followed up the announcement of the Tupi field by withdrawing neighbouring blocks from an auction of exploration rights due later this month. That might signal rising petro-nationalism. But it also looked prudent, since those blocks may be worth much more as more becomes known about Tupi.

Amid the euphoria, which included an instant leap of 26% in Petrobras’s share price, came suspicion about the timing of the announcement. Less than a week after it was made, the company announced a poor set of results, with operating profit down 22% compared with the same quarter last year.

Petrobras has also faced mounting difficulties in supplying natural gas to thermal power plants, especially since its fields in Bolivia were quasi-nationalised last year. Some see the Tupi announcement as an attempt to distract attention from this. “It is like throwing a second ball onto a football pitch when the game is going against you,” says Alexandre Marinis of Mosaico, a political consultancy.

Electricity rationing under the previous government in 2001-2 helped Lula to win office. One solution now would be to raise the price of gas, but officials are worried that this would feed into inflation, and jeopardise the scope for further cuts in interest rates. Mario Pereira, an energy consultant, reckons that the risk of electricity shortages should wane after 2008, if Petrobras completes a planned liquefied natural-gas terminal on time.

That may be a big if. Lula and Ms Rousseff, a former Trotskyist who is sometimes touted as a potential presidential candidate for the ruling Workers’ Party, were keen to associate the government with Petrobras’s strike. But the oil may not start flowing until after the next presidential election in 2010. Energy may be an electoral headache rather than a boon for the government, if not for the country.

09/11/2007 - 07:17h Tupi field a boost for Brazil’s Petrobras

By Sheila McNulty in Houston and agencies – FINANCIAL TIMES

Published: November 8 2007 22:43 | Last updated: November 9 2007 08:38

Petroleo Brasileiro, or Petrobras, Brazil’s state-owned oil company, on Thursday said well tests revealed its Tupi field may contain as much as 8bn barrels of oil and natural gas, which would considerably bolster the country’s energy clout.

The estimate, if correct, would raise the country’s reserves by 62 per cent and just about put Tupi on par with Norway’s 8.5bn barrels of proved oil reserves.

Brazil has 14.4bn barrels of proved reserves of oil and natural-gas equivalent.

The news pushed up Petrobras’ shares 9.95 reais, or 14.2 per cent, to 80.2 on the São Paulo stock exchange, the biggest rise in more than nine years.

It also lifted the share price of BG Group, which holds a 25 per cent stake in the field for a second day. BG shares opened 33p higher at £10.22, following Thursday’s 10 per cent advance.

Shares in Galp Energia of Portugal, which holds 10 per cent, also rose for a second session. The shares, which had their biggest one-day gain in Lisbon on Thursday, rose 21 per cent €2.60 on Friday to €14.95.

Petrobras’ news release contained few details beyond the fact that the estimates were made after analysis of the formation tests for a second well in the area.

The company also said the oil within was light, which is more valuable because it is cheaper to refine than the heavier crude oil that Brazil mostly produces.

“Tupi changes everything for Brazil and Petrobras,’’ said Carlos Renato Nunes, an oil analyst with São Paulo-based brokerage Coinvalores CCVM who has a buy recommendation on Petrobras shares.

“Tupi is not only huge, its light oil offers huge cost advantages.’’

And at a time when oil is heading towards $100 a barrel, and energy security is high on the agenda of many governments, the news is sure to boost Brazil’s economic influence. Petrobras, already a well-respected national oil company on the world stage, is likely to receive a further boost from the discovery.

“Brazil needs time to evaluate its new oil potential,’’ Dilma Rousseff, president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s cabinet chief, said at a news conference in Rio de Janeiro.

“This could make Brazil jump from an intermediate producer to among the world’s largest producers.’’

Tupi is three-quarters the size of Kazakh­stan’s Kashagan field, which holds 12bn barrels of recoverable crude and was the biggest find in the past 30 years.

There have only been a few gas discoveries in the past 20 years that would rival it, including the Shtokman field in Russia at 23bn barrels of oil equivalent, and two other Russian finds in the 5bn to 10bn range, Andy Latham, vice-president of exploration services at Wood Mackenzie Consultants in London, said.

09/11/2007 - 07:06h Rising Demand for Oil Provokes New Energy Crisis

The New York Times

With oil prices approaching the symbolic threshold of $100 a barrel, the world is headed toward its third energy shock in a generation. But today’s surge is fundamentally different from the previous oil crises, with broad and longer-lasting global implications.

Skip to next paragraph

Enlarge This Image

Hiroke Masuike for The New York Times

Traders at the New York Mercantile Exchange Thursday,
where the price for a barrel of crude oil settled at $95.46.

Related

Times Topics: Oil and Gasoline

Just as in the energy crises of the 1970s and ’80s, today’s high prices are causing anxiety and pain for consumers, and igniting wider fears about the impact on the economy.

Unlike past oil shocks, which were caused by sudden interruptions in exports from the Middle East, this time prices have been rising steadily as demand for gasoline grows in developed countries, as hundreds of millions of Chinese and Indians climb out of poverty and as other developing economies grow at a sizzling pace.

“This is the world’s first demand-led energy shock,” said Lawrence Goldstein, an economist at the Energy Policy Research Foundation of Washington.

Forecasts of future oil prices range widely. Some analysts see them falling next year to $75, or even lower, while a few project $120 oil. Virtually no one foresees a return to the $20 oil of a decade ago, meaning consumers should brace for an era of significantly higher fuel costs.

At the root of the stunning rise in the price of oil, up 56 percent this year and 365 percent in a decade, is a positive development: an unprecedented boom in the world economy.

Demand from China and India alone is expected to double in the next two decades as their economies continue to expand, with people there buying more cars and moving to cities to seek a way of life long taken for granted in the West.

But as prices rise, the global economy is entering uncharted territory. The increase so far does not appear to be hurting economic growth, but many economists wonder how long that will last. “These prices are too high and will end up hurting everybody, producers and consumers alike,” said Fatih Birol, chief economist at the International Energy Agency.

Oil futures closed at $95.46 on the New York Mercantile Exchange yesterday, down nearly 1 percent from the day before. But the price has become volatile, and many analysts expect the psychologically important $100-a-barrel threshold to be breached sometime in the next few weeks.

“Today’s markets feel like the crowds standing up in the final minutes of a football game shouting: ‘Go! Go! Go!,’” said Daniel Yergin, an oil historian and the chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a consulting firm. “People seem almost more relaxed about $100 than they were about $60 or $70 oil.”

Oil is not far from its historic inflation-adjusted high, reached in April 1980 in the aftermath of the Iranian revolution. At the time, oil jumped to the equivalent of $101.70 a barrel in today’s money.

For most of the 20th century, as it transformed the modern world, oil was cheap and abundant. Throughout the 1990s, for example, oil prices averaged $20 a barrel. Even at today’s highs, oil is cheaper than imported bottled water, which would cost $180 a barrel, or milk, at $150 a barrel.

“The concern today is over how will the energy sector meet the anticipated growth in demand over the longer term,” said Linda Z. Cook, a board member of Royal Dutch Shell, the big oil company. “Energy demand is increasing at a rate we’ve not seen before. On the supply side, we’re seeing it is struggling to keep up. That’s the energy challenge.”

More than any other country, China represents the scope of that challenge. As it turned into a global economic behemoth over the last decade, China also became a major energy user. Its economy has grown at a furious pace of about 10 percent a year since the 1990s, lifting nearly 300 million people out of poverty. But rapid industrialization has come at a price: oil demand has more than tripled since 1980, turning a country that was once self-sufficient into a net oil importer.

India and China are home to about a third of humanity. People there are demanding access to electricity, cars, and consumer goods and can increasingly afford to compete with the West for access to resources. In doing so, the two Asian giants are profoundly transforming the world’s energy balance.

Today, China consumes only a third as much oil as the United States, which burns a quarter of the world’s oil each day. By 2030, India and China together will import as much oil as the United States and Japan do today.

While demand is growing fastest abroad, Americans’ appetite for big cars and large houses has pushed up oil demand steadily in this country, too. Europe has managed to rein in oil consumption through a combination of high gasoline taxes, small cars and efficient public transportation, but Americans have not. Oil consumption in the United States, where gasoline is far cheaper than in Europe, has jumped to 21 million barrels a day this year, from about 17 million barrels in the early 1990s.

If the Chinese and Indians consumed as much oil for each person as Americans do, the world’s oil consumption would be more than 200 million barrels a day, instead of the 85 million barrels it is today. No expert regards that level of production as conceivable.

More realistically, global demand is expected to rise to about 115 million barrels a day by 2030, a level that is likely to tax the world’s ability to pump more oil out of the ground. Already, the world is running on a limited cushion of spare capacity; any interruption in supplies, whether from hurricanes or armed conflict, causes prices to spike.

“We don’t have any shock absorbers,” Mr. Goldstein said.

For oil companies, high prices have set off a frenzied search for new sources around the world. After a long lull in investments through most of the 1990s because of low prices, major oil companies have invested billions of dollars to bring in more supplies.

The trouble is that these big new developments take a long time, and companies have been hobbled by higher costs. The cost of drilling rigs, for example, the basic tool of the trade, has doubled in recent years. Analysts say it will take time, but new supplies will eventually work their way to market.

Supplies have also been hampered by political tension in the Persian Gulf, the war in Iraq, devastating hurricanes in the oil-producing Gulf of Mexico, production difficulties in Venezuela and violence in Nigeria’s oil-rich province. Many of these geopolitical factors have contributed to a political risk premium variously estimated at $25 to $50 a barrel. Recently, in just nine weeks, oil jumped from $75 to $95 a barrel for little apparent reason.

“Fifty-dollar-a-barrel oil seems so far away at this point,” said Thomas Bentz, a senior energy analyst at BNP Paribas in New York, citing a figure that seemed an impossibly high price for oil only a few years ago. “Oil will stop rising when we see demand destruction. We haven’t seen that yet.”

When will it happen? Veterans of the oil business, having lived through booms and busts, say no one should count on oil rising forever. Economic slowdowns in China or the United States — or especially, in both — would probably send prices tumbling.

It happened a mere decade ago, after the Asian financial crisis sent economies there into a tailspin. Global oil prices fell by half, from $20 a barrel to $10, in months.

“It would be a big mistake to think the laws of supply and demand have been abolished,” Mr. Yergin said.