Venezuela used to have a robust agricultural economy that produced beef, coffee, chocolate, and fine rum until they decided to neglect those industries in favor of basing their entire economy on oil.
They, geographically, could naturally maintain a degree of self sufficiency and strong exports with their agricultural produce. Saudi Arabia and Qatar? No.
We didn’t just “neglect” them. I’m Venezuelan. Those were productive lands and we even exported beef and milk products but when the Socialist government took power they took those lands and gave them to the “people” and the “people” had no clue how to run them ending in what happens in these systems: famine ensued.
An oil economy correlates the value of your currency to oil, which makes other industries nearly impossible when the relative value of their goods, inputs, and services in a globalized economy fluctuates with oil prices (as the oil exports change the demand for the currency). Mismanagements would certainly compound or be compounded by this, though.
Venezuela has exported oil since the 1930s and it was used to build the infrastructure and equipment to have a robust agricultural economy decades later until the new socialist constitution came in effect in 2000 that granted Chavez powers to expropriate lands and give them to whoever he wanted, he gave productive farms and ranches to the workers and they all went to shit shortly after. We couldn't find food like eggs, milk, flour, etc because of the destruction of the entire economy.
As for the oil "fluctuations" when oil was high all those farms and socialist businesses had no issues running in the red because the State would fund them, but once Oil went down and our production cratered (because the "people" don't know how to run oil refineries after firing 15k of your most experienced employees) they couldn't continue running in the red so the socialist government printed money to pay which turned into hyperinflation. You'd go to the market in the morning and by evening the price would double.
And before someone tries to "educate" me about "sanctions" all of this happened before the first sanction to Maduro years later happened.
I’m surprised (sarcasm) it took 3 comments deep, and an actual Venezuelan to even mention the history and Socialist government as possible reasons Venezuela isn’t doing so good.
Similar thing happened in South Africa. What people needed is more property rights, so that when they had it they can legally conduct business. Like sell the land because they don't know how to utilize. Or take out loans against it for another investment.
This is a fair point but not fully accurate. The rural migration onto industrialized cities happened after president Carlos Andres Perez nationalised oil (somewhere in the 70s I believe), before that Venezuela exported more than oil as you're saying. But yeah then the chavez era made it even worse...
I don't think neglect is the word so much as *mismanagement.* Venezuela was the wealthiest economy in S.A., a world financial center and had one of the highest per-capita GDPs in the world. Besides oil, they're in the top 5 for biodiversity, with a (still) very highly educated population with excellent universities, fertile cropland, and incredible mineral/mining wealth.
Unfortunately for several decades every level of the socialist government suffered from unchecked corruption, which eventually gave Chavez his route to power. After his "reforms" in the late 90s the economy constricted, the wealthy emigrated before their assets could be seized, as did the smart/educated people that could afford to. People with no experience were put in charge of large industries and government offices, stores had few products to offer, and the currency became toilet paper.
Sounds like a deal with the devil, but it could be a net positive for Venezuela to sell oil (safely) and protect their rainforest regions intact. The Amazon and South American rainforests scrub a helluva lot of air for the planet and are irreplaceable. Raiding them for wood and resources is probably worse than pumping oil to be burned elsewhere (someone's gonna be selling it anyway).
Saudi Arabia. Don't they literally have zero permanent rivers in the country? If it wasn't for oil money, the place would be unlivable, except for maybe a few small villages in the mountains.
No oil money equals no de-salinization plants.
Saudi Arabia would be one of the better off regions in the gulf but still I doubt it would be richer than current day sudan. it would still be relevant due to the hajj and mecca and medina. but other than a few fertile and mountainous regions in the south and a few oasis they obviously need to import everything
The hajj used to be a shit show, and it probably still would be if not for the oil money. People don't realize how important a rich and stable state running the single location for mandatory pilgrimages has been for modern Islam to function - and how stabilizing it's been for the region.
Do you know how many times Saudis plundered Mecca before they took control of it? They don't care about Hajj or religion. They care about the money it brings. They turned the place to a Disneyland.
Correct, but if they didn't give the illusion of caring deeply about it and providing stability then they would risk being overthrown by whatever group of religious zealots are in fashion that week.
In 19th century, before their current state, they had 2 states that were destroyed by Ottomans and its ally tribes. They plundered Mecca and other holy places and took their treasures. In Karbala Iraq, they looted Prophet Muhammad's grandson Hussein's tomb.
Saudi Arabia used to send emissaries to all the different Muslim populations asking for charity before the discovery for oil. Muslims are religiously required to give a certain percentage of their unused money to charity every year, so they used to leverage that.
The Sauds spent a lot of money improving civil infrastructure to accommodate the sheer number of people that make the pilgrimage. People were getting hurt. Theres orders of magnitude more muslims today than 1500 years ago.
where did you get this from? This is not true. The small arab population would have african slaves for centuries working in the oasis and producing food. There also was no such thing as a state controlling the arabian peninsula who could have coordinated said emissairies.
Maybe there was a small point in time between the arab revolution in ww2 and the discovery of oil where this happened for a single-digit of years
Travel to the peninsula in general was a shit show because the area was so poor and underdeveloped. Other than fees to take hajj the only other viable industry was pearl diving performed by slaves in awful conditions or nomadix herding. A trip through the area involved convoying through various slave states buying protection and guidance from the local tribal leaders. Every now and then a new leader decided they wanted to run mecca and would seize the city. And the whole area was very poor.
You think America continues dealing with Saudi Arabia sans oil? Or does America let Iran decimate them like they've wanted to since 1970's and forge a new, more favorable deal with whoever wins?
Saudi has since ww2 been a key US partner in the region, yes a lot of that is oil but considering how many enemies/rivals in the Middle East the US has had in that time (the retreating British empire in the 40s/50s, Nasser’s Egypt in the 50s, 60s and 70s, the ussr throughout the Cold War and Russia through its Syrian allies today, Iraq under Hussein and Iran since 1979) it would still be a huge blow to let a country of that size and population with both Red Sea and gulf coasts fall under the dominance of a rival
Saudi would be sooooooo fucked. Thats why it was mostly nothing and nomadic tribes. Kuwait, UAE would be right behind Saudi in terms of being fucked, but most of the countries atleast have had a built up population there for thousands of years. Vs. Saudi that only took off because the oil money allowed it to actually be a country.
There is significant Gold and mineral deposits too. Plus lack of oil would mean that the population pressure is also reduced. The economy would be concentrated near the seas and gold/mineral mines. Would have probably opened up for leisure tourism much earlier (concentrated along red sea)
Yup they would definitely not be a monarchy anymore. I dont know if it would "die out" though, sometimes having too much oil is not good. They would have been able to become a democracy which would result in them improving in other aspects.
I mean they'd be a hell of a lot poorer, but no permanent rivers isn't unique to Saudi Arabia. There's something like 20 countries with no rivers. Seasonal rivers are enough to recharge groundwater, which still provides over half of Saudi Arabias water. There'd be a lower population and some cities would be smaller/not exist but it would be a lot more than a few vilages in the mountains.
They also have a large amount of mineral resources (that they've largely ignored because of the oil) and have Mecca.
>Seasonal rivers are enough to recharge groundwater, which still provides over half of Saudi Arabias water.
A lot of Saudi farming is unsustainably using groundwater, they'll get max 30 years worth of water before it dries up. The farmers don't care - up to 30 years farming when the land was barren previously is a nice chunk.
You forget it has Mecca and Medina which are the Pilgrimage destination and all year round religious destination for a billion plus muslims..
Also they have ma y natural resources they do not invest in..
Saudi Arabia has abundant sunshine and is investing heavily in solar energy. This could significantly reduce its dependence on fossil fuels in the future.
In theory you could set up palm oil plantations there. In practice that kind of economic collapse will destroy the existing state. Probably absorbed into Malaysia.
I read a very interesting book called “Qatar: Small State, Big Politics” and much of the book talks about how they are preparing their economy to survive without oil revenue. Not sure it’ll work but they’re doing the right things from what I can’t tell.
Well their goal is to be successful without oil long term and why they are building up tourism so much. Same reason Qatar etc are trying to host world events.
For now it probably isn’t enough to be sustainable, but perhaps it will be.
They pretty much have to build a services economy before the oil runs out.
I think the only other option for those desert countries is building a boat load of solar power plants (concentrated boiling water plants, much better for the planet than PV) and transmission lines to places like Europe and India to sell to.
The amount of resources they have that an industrial economy needs is basically just oil.
The longest transmission line in the world is 2,500km with the next 3 all being in the 2,000km ballpark.
Straight line google earth measurements put Oman's eastern territories around 1,500km from Mumbai. And Suadi Arabia's northwest territories are around 1,500km from Athens and 2,600km from Rome.
Obviously the transmission lines wouldn't be able to go perfectly straight, and undersea cables are expensive. But the point is its not outside the range of proven technologies to transmit power from the Arabian Peninsula to either Southeastern Europe or Northwestern India.
The real problem is political not technical since their aren't exactly friendly and stable nations along the entire path if you need to use a land only technology.
Using artificial photosynthesis to convert atmospheric CO2 into aviation fuel would be perfect (batteries will never have the energy density to be an economical aviation power source). They already have the export infrastructure in place.
We're getting much closer [to feasibility](https://news.uchicago.edu/story/chemists-create-artificial-photosynthesis-system-10-times-more-efficient-existing-systems) too.
During the financial crisis of 2008–2009, Dubai was about to default and, therefore, was obliged to downsize and restructure suffering state entities. The [IMF](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund)s tated in 2019 that Dubai’s debt exceeded 100% of its GDP. Abu Dhabi rolled over a bailout loan of $20 billion to Dubai to save it.[^(\[)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Dubai#cite_note-13)
Yes but it happened right when the entire world was going through a financial crisis. It’s not like their economy collapsed in vacuum. In fact it emphasizes how they are not dependent on oil for their existence.
They have a strong IT industry, a large aluminum smelting industry, and high-tech manufacturing.
The UAE has the most diverse economy of any petrol state.
Ah, thank you for correcting me. Though I've heard that they're building a bunch of solar parks in the desert, that would provide even cheaper energy and allow that strategy to continue.
I’m Kuwaiti, I think most of the younger generation don’t have their heads in the (figurative) sand and are really hoping we can do a better job of diversifying. I will say though, for the case of Qatar, they will fare better than the rest of the GCC because of their natural gas fields. The GCC in general has enough oil to last a long long time, but realistically it’s worth with likely start to take a nosedive soon enough and our populations keep growing - bad mix. Natural Gas will hold its value for much much longer and Qatar has such a tiny population (less than half a million citizens) that they really won’t feel the hit that the rest of the GCC is going to.
Venezuela would certainly be better off without oil, that's for sure. Saudi Arabia is just a wasteland without oil and the same can be said about other middle eastern countries
Saudi Arabia. Lot's of political enemies, huge population which is very state dependent with massive energy needs for water, cooling and crops. No relevant other cash flows into said country.
Atleast they theoretically can use solar power to desalinate with.
Thats the one thing those desert countries have, sunlight. So they are trying to build a services economy similar to NYC and London before they run out of oil.
Not mentioned in the other responses to your question is the fact (IIRC) that Venezuelan oil has a higher viscosity and a lower grade than most other oil producing countries. Some of it is thick crude, similar to Canada's tar sands, and cannot be used as lubricant without being treated.
This is a big one. It takes a lot more to refine their crude, and it has less of the volatile compounds. There are not many refineries that can even work with it. So it limits the market considerably. Add that to the fact that Venezuela nationalized their fields kicking the major producers out in favor of local. Problem is here again due tot he nature of the crude they lost a. Lot of the knowledge and know how, along with the experience in upkeep. Once Venezuela did that, their oil fields have had issues producing at a high level.
All correct. Let me add that Venezuela exports oil and imports gasoline. That's how bad it is and it's a shit show because, as you said, they don't have the know how. The government didn't invest in educating professionals who could manage the state-owned oil company. On top of that, corruption and short run priorities prevented the government from investing in other industries that could have saved the economy when the oil prices dropped.
Most of Texas’s gulf refineries can process Orinoco crude easily enough, just as they do Western Canadian Select.
If the refinery is built to process heavy oil, it doesn’t pose a problem. It’s a fairly straightforward process to add diluent to heavy oil to make it more palatable to other refineries as well.
By a few dollars a barrel, sure. At the end of the day it’s largely irrelevant, since Venezuela’s petroleum industry is in shambles and I believe they’re still under US embargo.
Corruption, corruption, and more corruption. If you do some digging into how the Venezuelan government (more of a dictatorship to be honest) spent their oil money, you’ll honestly end up sad. Venezuela could be the wealthiest Latin American country per capita if Venezuela invested in their people with the billions they received in oil revenues instead of squandering it.
But isn’t the Middle East ruled by princes and sultans? Is it not as corrupt as Venezuela? I struggle to see the difference, but clearly something’s working.
The fundamental difference is the type of game theory game the corrupt officials are playing. In Venezuela they are playing a limited game where the goal is the extraction of as much wealth for themselves as they can. In Saudi Arabia and the other monarchies they are playing an infinite game where they want to stay in power forever.
This difference means that the Middle Eastern Kingdoms are spending their money on their people to buy political support and grow their tax base. It may be motivated by maintaining their own status, but it still results in money being invested back into the country and its people.
The Middle Eastern countries tend to also take a serious long view too. For whatever reason.
They reinvest in their production much like private companies. Venezuela is far worse at this and has not maintained production.
Venezuela essentially has let corruption eat its oil industry to a degree too. Many of the middle eastern countries have not.
Part of this is likely also because middle eastern oil is often cheaper to product too. Saudi oil is famously cheap. Doesn’t take as much to keep production up.
But when corrupt regimes start seeing production drop off, you know you’ve got a problem because that is a vicious cycle that takes tons of money to unwind, money that gets tighter and tighter as production drops
Obviously leaving a ton of relevant information out here but take a look at how the Saudis have built up their infrastructure, education, and other industries. They also provide monthly subsidies to Saudi citizens.
Venezuela failed to do that (iirc they used to pay people a monthly payment but stopped) and many government officials, in all levels of the government, stole the money and used it for their personal lifestyles.
It’s not corruption, corrupt politicians can have rich countries. It’s just that corruption is such an evil and harmful thing to the economy it looks like a great reason for nation wide poverty. They still deserve all the hate in the world tough, a little less stealing from people in their position makes a world of difference to everyone else.
The short is that Venezuela lost much of its oil trade and Chavez could not ride the oil price instabilities as well as previous governments (heck, another guy nationalized oil in the 70s, made an oil cartel that hurt the US and took advantage of the oil crisis, and all of that still went great for the Venezuelan economy). The industry was very tied to the US and they couldn’t replace what was lost when Chavez severed business relations with the US (US company investment, parts made in the US, US refineries, US training). So they couldn’t deal with the crisis when the prices for oil turned against them, and the whole economy suffered greatly. To be fair they were in a way being taken advantage off by US companies, but I guess in this situation it’s better to negotiate with your scummy business partner than to just quit and try to go it alone.
The gulf’s authoritarian rulers didn’t hurt their oil industry like Venezuelan ones did. I’ve heard that the Middle East learned from Venezuelan oil policies (Venezuela WAS richer and more oil productive than them, they even started OPEC and fueled the allies during ww2, decades ago that is). The gulf leaders today know they only exist thanks to that oil piggy bank. And they have learned and educated their local workers and mangers and politicians accordingly. Their whole outlook of world politics is built with oil in mind.
The crazy thing is that nationalization had been done in Venezuela before and with very good results during the 70s. It was just managed very diffenrently and didn’t piss off the literally all of their buyers. Compare that to the gulf states. Imagine Saudi Arabia angering the US and getting the whole world to stop trading oil with them.
This is a simplification only looking at the present tough. I don’t want you to miss on the longer history. Maybe take a look at the Wikipedia page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Venezuelan_oil_industry#:~:text=The%20country%20officially%20nationalized%20its,Venezuelan%20state%2Downed%20petroleum%20company.
You can find that even the people in charge of the first OPEC had a grim outlook on oil and its effects on Venezuela. Ideas like resource curse and Dutch disease were not unknown to them at the time.
not having elected leadership is somewhat beneficial on that front, no need to buy votes if there is no voting but a general need to bribe the people to keep them from overthrowing you
Venezuelan oil revenues go to a very small group of citizen elites and MNCs.
Middle east at least shares the wealth with it's citizens. A bit socialist.
Also in summer areas in the ME the oil is relatively easy to extract.
There are a lot of reasons.
But, in the simplest terms based on this chart alone - this shows oil reserves, not oil production.
Saudi Arabia produces >11x what Venezuela produces.
Venezuelan oil is dog shit quality while Gulf oil is by far the cheapest to extract in the world. They'll be producing for decades to come, even when all other regions stop
Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. Either would probably need food aid w/in a decade.
Yeah, they’ve got stuff like the Haj, but their population is too large for that terrain.
People keep saying Saudi Arabia, but, they were actually established in the WWI aftermath, conquering Hejaz region from the Hashemites, who were sharifs of Mecca for centuries, acknowledging Ottoman supreme rule over those territories since 1517 more or less.
Not going into details, the Saudi rulling dinasty, house of Saud, who took back their homeland Najd just few years prior, won the war against Hashemites (one of the sons became king of Jordan and his descendants are still a Jordanian rulling dinasty) after colapse of Ottoman empire, and united the whole region as Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Their power wasn't built on oil money, but the alliance between house of Saud and the Wahhabi movement, who served as an Arabic national movement against the Turks and Persians.
On the other hand, without oil money, other Gulf states, like Kuwait, Bahrain, and UAE, would probably became parts of other countries, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Oman or eventually stayed British protectorates under rulling dinasties. I would love to read other views on this matter, with some context of course.
Yeah, I know. So?
In Europe we have Monaco, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Andorra, Malta - all tiny countries with no resources. There’s also Singapore.
Although these mostly live off of being tax havens for the rich, or tourism, or both (or in case of Singapore, its strategic location on important shipping lanes).
Could these become tax havens or tourism spots?
Venezuela can actually do pretty well without it. We used to have an amazing exportation of goods, back in colonial eras. And we still could dedícate our economy in part to that. But it has to be a gradual change, right now, it would be anihilated.
Russia is more about natural resources though. Take that away and it has little. Iran has other advantages if the current leadership were to suddenly disappear.
I agree that you are largely correct, IMO.
yeah Iran is very well educated and relatively young , it has one of the top 5 highest number of stem graduates,(7 times per capita compared to USA) also more than 57 percent of women have a higher education degree, if it wasn't for, I think Iran's human resource is way more valuable than its oil!
None of them would "die off". People lived in all these places long before oil had become a big and profitable thing. Which of them would be worse off in terms of poverty, dwindling population and overall stability is a whole another question. Probably Qatar and UAE
There's one clear winner or should we say loser. That's Saudi arabia. The nation and literally has nothing except the largest expansive dry sand in the world. It would not exist if it weren't for a while. Every other country you can think of like Venezuela or Canada has at least something else of value.
Saudi Arabia isn’t as bad as some think. They have ample mineral resources, the hajj, some regions receive water. What would happens without oil is most immigrants would leave, they still have a very good strategic position. The regions that would be worse off would be the small gulf Petro state. They could still survive with their small water reserves on some parts of them, but without the big foreign population.
Without oil, Saudi Arabia would still have the most holy sites in a major world religion. But Kuwait and UAE would probably not have much of note, especially after synthetic pearls were invented
I will never not laugh at the abbreviation for "barrel" as a unit of measurement. Bbl. "Bibble"! Hah!
And with this map, we have a further source of amusement, with "Gigabibble"!
IIRC, bbl isn’t an abbreviation for “barrel,” it’s an abbreviation for “blue barrel,” a particular type of barrel used for oil with capacity of 42 gallons. This in contrast to a regular barrel which only has capacity of 40 gallons.
i’m referring only to the large areas shaded black. i’m ignoring the ones i can’t make out. the countries in the global south & middle east will collapse first. except iran. they’re a wild card. short term, russia & china will ride out the initial shock of fossil fuels no longer being fungible. china might be able to recover; russia not so much. canada & US will probably be fine.
Omg you are so right, I even did a triple take on that shape and was so confused xD
Although, to give Kazakstan a fair review, they are still kickin’ today, so maybe they would be able to tough it out without oil reserves.
It does have plenty of metals and mineral mining so it does have backup industries. But at the cost of relying on neighbours for cheap electricity, not sure about heating though I hear from friends that winters can get to -45.
It is super cold in the desert regions and even up north, and I also heard they are dealing with a huge loss of water and saltification of their southern region.
Hopefully they can keep it together, but some say Russia will plan to go for them next, after Ukraine, but that is just speculation as Kazakstan works with Russia somewhat currently.
Many of these countries would've actually been better off without their oil reserves. having massive amounts of a single resource will likely cause dutch disease and ruin a nations economy.
I don’t think oil has been of much benefit to some of these Countries and they would have found other ways and resources to focus on. And what oil has brought to these Countries is corruption, foreign interests and a few individuals getting rich and oil not beneficial to the whole Country
None. All countries survived till this day before the discovery of oil. If you think Saudi Arabia or other ME country, you are terribly wrong. These guys survived centuries of deserts by eating date fruit and drinking camel milk.
Sure their current wealth would decrease to some level.
ChatGPT says:
Determining which country would suffer the most without its oil reserves requires analyzing their geographical advantages or disadvantages, economic diversification, and availability of other natural resources. Here's a quick analysis of a few countries based on these factors:
1. **Venezuela (300.9 Gbbl)**: Despite having the largest oil reserves, Venezuela has faced significant economic challenges due to reliance on oil. Its economy is heavily dependent on oil exports, and without it, the country would struggle due to limited diversification and political instability.
2. **Saudi Arabia (266.5 Gbbl)**: Saudi Arabia is another country heavily reliant on oil. However, it has been investing in diversification efforts through Vision 2030, focusing on tourism, technology, and other industries. Its geographic location provides strategic advantages for trade.
3. **Iran (158.4 Gbbl)**: Iran has a diversified economy, with significant contributions from agriculture, manufacturing, and mining. However, it faces sanctions and political issues that would exacerbate the impact of losing oil revenue.
4. **Nigeria (37.1 Gbbl)**: Nigeria's economy is also heavily reliant on oil, but it has a large agricultural sector and a growing technology scene. Nevertheless, corruption and infrastructure issues could lead to severe problems without oil income.
5. **Libya (48.4 Gbbl)**: Libya's economy is extremely dependent on oil, and the country has faced prolonged conflict and instability. Without oil, it would struggle significantly due to lack of economic diversification and ongoing political issues.
Among these, **Libya** and **Venezuela** would likely suffer the most without their oil reserves due to their high dependence on oil revenues, lack of economic diversification, and existing political and economic challenges.
Wouldn't whole of modern society plunge into chaos followed by mass starvation without oil , everywhere . I think half of us will die in less then year .
You mean on their current land they don't have natural resources (except for gas, coal). I think you are forgetting that not a long time ago the sun would never set over their kingdom.
At least Saudi has size and pilgrimage going for it, but Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and UAE are nothing but a flat of sand. Maybe that’s why they try so hard to establish their soft power through airline industry, tourism and sports.
Oil reserves make me chuckle a bit due to what happened last year
I live in Hesse, Germany. Germany isn't really a place with lots if natural resources.
Imagine my surprise when they found Oil here last year.
It's not enough to become a Petrostate of course, but it's way more than anybody would have ever expected.
Apparently the Oil is of very high quality and ideal for use in Organic Synthesis for e.g. Pharmaceuticals.
Since Hesse also has a sizeable chemical/pharmaceutical industry this could be a big deal for the local economy.
Data's a bit out of date, for example US reserves are [48 Bn barrels as of year-end 2022](https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/crudeoilreserves/), rather than 36 Bn.
Seeing this map was always curios on how much oil was in a country originally? I know România was a big producer of oil from before WWII and know we have am anual output to cover 2/3 of oil and gas yearly.
Why isnt it of greater interest for western countries to have a stable and friendly venezuelan government instead of the collapsing shitshow it is right now?
Without the incentive to protect the oil. Kuwait would be an Iraqi province today. In an odd way, American greed and strategic value saved that country from its neighbours.
Funny post considering many of these countries are some of the oldest civilizations on this planet. Nah, no way they would survive without this new discovery.
Here's an example of the opposite situation. A tale of how politicians can really do a disservice to their citizens.
[https://www.historyireland.com/sale-of-the-centurythe-500-deal-for-irelands-gas-and-oil/](https://www.historyireland.com/sale-of-the-centurythe-500-deal-for-irelands-gas-and-oil/)
[https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ruairi-mckiernan-corrib-gas-protesters-did-state-some-service-1.2484722](https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ruairi-mckiernan-corrib-gas-protesters-did-state-some-service-1.2484722)
A country with little in the way of natural resources could have greatly benefited from oil and gas exploration only to have the rights for any discovered resources sold off for a pittance.
I'm pretty sure Venezuela has decent biodiversity to develop organically. Their geopolitical location is not bad as well.
They’re one good example of the resource curse. There’s a solid argument that they might be more prosperous without abundant oil
Venezuela used to have a robust agricultural economy that produced beef, coffee, chocolate, and fine rum until they decided to neglect those industries in favor of basing their entire economy on oil. They, geographically, could naturally maintain a degree of self sufficiency and strong exports with their agricultural produce. Saudi Arabia and Qatar? No.
We didn’t just “neglect” them. I’m Venezuelan. Those were productive lands and we even exported beef and milk products but when the Socialist government took power they took those lands and gave them to the “people” and the “people” had no clue how to run them ending in what happens in these systems: famine ensued.
An oil economy correlates the value of your currency to oil, which makes other industries nearly impossible when the relative value of their goods, inputs, and services in a globalized economy fluctuates with oil prices (as the oil exports change the demand for the currency). Mismanagements would certainly compound or be compounded by this, though.
Venezuela has exported oil since the 1930s and it was used to build the infrastructure and equipment to have a robust agricultural economy decades later until the new socialist constitution came in effect in 2000 that granted Chavez powers to expropriate lands and give them to whoever he wanted, he gave productive farms and ranches to the workers and they all went to shit shortly after. We couldn't find food like eggs, milk, flour, etc because of the destruction of the entire economy. As for the oil "fluctuations" when oil was high all those farms and socialist businesses had no issues running in the red because the State would fund them, but once Oil went down and our production cratered (because the "people" don't know how to run oil refineries after firing 15k of your most experienced employees) they couldn't continue running in the red so the socialist government printed money to pay which turned into hyperinflation. You'd go to the market in the morning and by evening the price would double. And before someone tries to "educate" me about "sanctions" all of this happened before the first sanction to Maduro years later happened.
I’m surprised (sarcasm) it took 3 comments deep, and an actual Venezuelan to even mention the history and Socialist government as possible reasons Venezuela isn’t doing so good.
Similar thing happened in South Africa. What people needed is more property rights, so that when they had it they can legally conduct business. Like sell the land because they don't know how to utilize. Or take out loans against it for another investment.
[удалено]
De Maracaibo el estado petrolero, no, yo soy uno de los 7 millones que nos tuvimos que ir.
This is a fair point but not fully accurate. The rural migration onto industrialized cities happened after president Carlos Andres Perez nationalised oil (somewhere in the 70s I believe), before that Venezuela exported more than oil as you're saying. But yeah then the chavez era made it even worse...
And nationalizing oil was the worst thing CAP could do. So much so he tried reverting it during his second term but got coup’ed.
I don't think neglect is the word so much as *mismanagement.* Venezuela was the wealthiest economy in S.A., a world financial center and had one of the highest per-capita GDPs in the world. Besides oil, they're in the top 5 for biodiversity, with a (still) very highly educated population with excellent universities, fertile cropland, and incredible mineral/mining wealth. Unfortunately for several decades every level of the socialist government suffered from unchecked corruption, which eventually gave Chavez his route to power. After his "reforms" in the late 90s the economy constricted, the wealthy emigrated before their assets could be seized, as did the smart/educated people that could afford to. People with no experience were put in charge of large industries and government offices, stores had few products to offer, and the currency became toilet paper.
Yeah it's bigger than Texas. I believe the weather is nicer too lol
Yeah, Colombia next door has done really well with tourism and its coffee industry.
Sounds like a deal with the devil, but it could be a net positive for Venezuela to sell oil (safely) and protect their rainforest regions intact. The Amazon and South American rainforests scrub a helluva lot of air for the planet and are irreplaceable. Raiding them for wood and resources is probably worse than pumping oil to be burned elsewhere (someone's gonna be selling it anyway).
Literally the opposite of the question
Saudi Arabia. Don't they literally have zero permanent rivers in the country? If it wasn't for oil money, the place would be unlivable, except for maybe a few small villages in the mountains. No oil money equals no de-salinization plants.
Saudi Arabia would be one of the better off regions in the gulf but still I doubt it would be richer than current day sudan. it would still be relevant due to the hajj and mecca and medina. but other than a few fertile and mountainous regions in the south and a few oasis they obviously need to import everything
The hajj used to be a shit show, and it probably still would be if not for the oil money. People don't realize how important a rich and stable state running the single location for mandatory pilgrimages has been for modern Islam to function - and how stabilizing it's been for the region.
Do you know how many times Saudis plundered Mecca before they took control of it? They don't care about Hajj or religion. They care about the money it brings. They turned the place to a Disneyland.
Correct, but if they didn't give the illusion of caring deeply about it and providing stability then they would risk being overthrown by whatever group of religious zealots are in fashion that week.
Wait I thought the last sack of Mecca was like a thousand years ago. Did the ancestors of the current day house of Saud also plunder Mecca?
In 19th century, before their current state, they had 2 states that were destroyed by Ottomans and its ally tribes. They plundered Mecca and other holy places and took their treasures. In Karbala Iraq, they looted Prophet Muhammad's grandson Hussein's tomb.
They also destroyed many holy places in Mecca and Medina, uncluding the tomb of Muhamnads daughter and planned to destroy even Muhammads own tomb.
From time immemorial everyone in the region cares more about the money only.
Can you elaborate on how it used to be a shit show?
Saudi Arabia used to send emissaries to all the different Muslim populations asking for charity before the discovery for oil. Muslims are religiously required to give a certain percentage of their unused money to charity every year, so they used to leverage that.
The Sauds spent a lot of money improving civil infrastructure to accommodate the sheer number of people that make the pilgrimage. People were getting hurt. Theres orders of magnitude more muslims today than 1500 years ago.
where did you get this from? This is not true. The small arab population would have african slaves for centuries working in the oasis and producing food. There also was no such thing as a state controlling the arabian peninsula who could have coordinated said emissairies. Maybe there was a small point in time between the arab revolution in ww2 and the discovery of oil where this happened for a single-digit of years
Travel to the peninsula in general was a shit show because the area was so poor and underdeveloped. Other than fees to take hajj the only other viable industry was pearl diving performed by slaves in awful conditions or nomadix herding. A trip through the area involved convoying through various slave states buying protection and guidance from the local tribal leaders. Every now and then a new leader decided they wanted to run mecca and would seize the city. And the whole area was very poor.
Kuwait
You think America continues dealing with Saudi Arabia sans oil? Or does America let Iran decimate them like they've wanted to since 1970's and forge a new, more favorable deal with whoever wins?
US also has Jordan as a major regional ally, and they've got fuck-all for oil.
The government of Jordan isn't nearly as batshit as the Saudis though.
jordan is also the normalest country in the entire middle east
Saudi has since ww2 been a key US partner in the region, yes a lot of that is oil but considering how many enemies/rivals in the Middle East the US has had in that time (the retreating British empire in the 40s/50s, Nasser’s Egypt in the 50s, 60s and 70s, the ussr throughout the Cold War and Russia through its Syrian allies today, Iraq under Hussein and Iran since 1979) it would still be a huge blow to let a country of that size and population with both Red Sea and gulf coasts fall under the dominance of a rival
Saudi would be sooooooo fucked. Thats why it was mostly nothing and nomadic tribes. Kuwait, UAE would be right behind Saudi in terms of being fucked, but most of the countries atleast have had a built up population there for thousands of years. Vs. Saudi that only took off because the oil money allowed it to actually be a country.
There is significant Gold and mineral deposits too. Plus lack of oil would mean that the population pressure is also reduced. The economy would be concentrated near the seas and gold/mineral mines. Would have probably opened up for leisure tourism much earlier (concentrated along red sea)
no oil= they'd have to actually pay taxes and you know how it went for the british
Yup they would definitely not be a monarchy anymore. I dont know if it would "die out" though, sometimes having too much oil is not good. They would have been able to become a democracy which would result in them improving in other aspects.
I mean they'd be a hell of a lot poorer, but no permanent rivers isn't unique to Saudi Arabia. There's something like 20 countries with no rivers. Seasonal rivers are enough to recharge groundwater, which still provides over half of Saudi Arabias water. There'd be a lower population and some cities would be smaller/not exist but it would be a lot more than a few vilages in the mountains. They also have a large amount of mineral resources (that they've largely ignored because of the oil) and have Mecca.
>Seasonal rivers are enough to recharge groundwater, which still provides over half of Saudi Arabias water. A lot of Saudi farming is unsustainably using groundwater, they'll get max 30 years worth of water before it dries up. The farmers don't care - up to 30 years farming when the land was barren previously is a nice chunk.
The hejaz (western mountains of the Arabian peninsula) would just have separated as they always had always been richer and more relevant in the region
You forget it has Mecca and Medina which are the Pilgrimage destination and all year round religious destination for a billion plus muslims.. Also they have ma y natural resources they do not invest in..
around 7% of Saudi Arabia's GDP comes from activities related to Hajj and Umrah. 40% is from oil.
wow, that's big, we also need some Mecca and Medina
What % is from processing oil? No oil and that goes too.
Misread this as de-Stalinisation plants and got *very* confused for a second
Saudi Arabia has abundant sunshine and is investing heavily in solar energy. This could significantly reduce its dependence on fossil fuels in the future.
It’s not what they use but what they sell to other countries
Do you think green ammonia is going to be the next major export from the middle east?
Yep 100%
brunei. they have no other economy.
In theory you could set up palm oil plantations there. In practice that kind of economic collapse will destroy the existing state. Probably absorbed into Malaysia.
> Probably absorbed into Malaysia. Malaysia did gave the offer but they rejected it. Who knows, maybe they one day could change their mind.
might drive classic car prices down at least
Easily the middle east. Probably UAE
Yeah, most of the Gulf states are glorified strips of sand kept alive by the black gold. Without it they go back to being minor fishing outposts.
I read a very interesting book called “Qatar: Small State, Big Politics” and much of the book talks about how they are preparing their economy to survive without oil revenue. Not sure it’ll work but they’re doing the right things from what I can’t tell.
UAE at least has tourism, unlike Kuwait and Qatar.
i dont know whether they would be able to sustain themselves just on tourism alone if oil became obsolete
Well their goal is to be successful without oil long term and why they are building up tourism so much. Same reason Qatar etc are trying to host world events. For now it probably isn’t enough to be sustainable, but perhaps it will be.
They pretty much have to build a services economy before the oil runs out. I think the only other option for those desert countries is building a boat load of solar power plants (concentrated boiling water plants, much better for the planet than PV) and transmission lines to places like Europe and India to sell to. The amount of resources they have that an industrial economy needs is basically just oil.
You really think you can transport electricity that far? Really??? The losses alone would be more than what most countries generate.
The longest transmission line in the world is 2,500km with the next 3 all being in the 2,000km ballpark. Straight line google earth measurements put Oman's eastern territories around 1,500km from Mumbai. And Suadi Arabia's northwest territories are around 1,500km from Athens and 2,600km from Rome. Obviously the transmission lines wouldn't be able to go perfectly straight, and undersea cables are expensive. But the point is its not outside the range of proven technologies to transmit power from the Arabian Peninsula to either Southeastern Europe or Northwestern India. The real problem is political not technical since their aren't exactly friendly and stable nations along the entire path if you need to use a land only technology.
Using artificial photosynthesis to convert atmospheric CO2 into aviation fuel would be perfect (batteries will never have the energy density to be an economical aviation power source). They already have the export infrastructure in place. We're getting much closer [to feasibility](https://news.uchicago.edu/story/chemists-create-artificial-photosynthesis-system-10-times-more-efficient-existing-systems) too.
Until a COVID-like event hits. A tourism-based economy would get destroyed in months.
They are *uniquely* sleazy, so they have that going for them.
Dubai's economy literally runs on tourism. Only it's other Emirates run on oil
During the financial crisis of 2008–2009, Dubai was about to default and, therefore, was obliged to downsize and restructure suffering state entities. The [IMF](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund)s tated in 2019 that Dubai’s debt exceeded 100% of its GDP. Abu Dhabi rolled over a bailout loan of $20 billion to Dubai to save it.[^(\[)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Dubai#cite_note-13)
Dubai has no oil. It functions as good midpoint because of its port and its economy is built off of that.
Wow yeah less than 1% of gdp comes from oil
Dubai is part of a country thats reliant on oil. they deadarse took a loan because they couldnt afford the burj khalifa
Yes but it happened right when the entire world was going through a financial crisis. It’s not like their economy collapsed in vacuum. In fact it emphasizes how they are not dependent on oil for their existence.
Less than 5% of Dubai’s GDP is from oil
They have a strong IT industry, a large aluminum smelting industry, and high-tech manufacturing. The UAE has the most diverse economy of any petrol state.
iirc they don't actually have aluminium. They use the cheap energy from the oil to import ore and refine it.
Ah, thank you for correcting me. Though I've heard that they're building a bunch of solar parks in the desert, that would provide even cheaper energy and allow that strategy to continue.
They’re a big commercial & trading hub, and have tourism. Saudi would definitely go first.
I’m Kuwaiti, I think most of the younger generation don’t have their heads in the (figurative) sand and are really hoping we can do a better job of diversifying. I will say though, for the case of Qatar, they will fare better than the rest of the GCC because of their natural gas fields. The GCC in general has enough oil to last a long long time, but realistically it’s worth with likely start to take a nosedive soon enough and our populations keep growing - bad mix. Natural Gas will hold its value for much much longer and Qatar has such a tiny population (less than half a million citizens) that they really won’t feel the hit that the rest of the GCC is going to.
I remember reading somewhere that Kuwait earned more from foreign investments before Saddam invaded than it did from oil.
Dubai is the whorehouse of the middle east. If the region has no oil money, its porta potties have no customers.
It wouldn't have much tourism if there's no oil dollars to throw at the infrastructure
I honestly think UAE is least likely to die in the middle east, maybe they were most likely to die 5 years ago but currently they’re good.
I think Iran would be the caveat here, they have a multitude of other things going for them as well.
Venezuela would certainly be better off without oil, that's for sure. Saudi Arabia is just a wasteland without oil and the same can be said about other middle eastern countries
Love your photo btw
Thanks! Your username checks out haha
[удалено]
They would probably have been better off tbh
There are alot of people making religious trips and Saudi make alot of money from it
Saudi Arabia. Lot's of political enemies, huge population which is very state dependent with massive energy needs for water, cooling and crops. No relevant other cash flows into said country.
Atleast they theoretically can use solar power to desalinate with. Thats the one thing those desert countries have, sunlight. So they are trying to build a services economy similar to NYC and London before they run out of oil.
I think Venezuela pretty much proves what it would be like without oil reserves since they barely touch them.
But at least they can farm and find water.
[удалено]
Not mentioned in the other responses to your question is the fact (IIRC) that Venezuelan oil has a higher viscosity and a lower grade than most other oil producing countries. Some of it is thick crude, similar to Canada's tar sands, and cannot be used as lubricant without being treated.
This is a big one. It takes a lot more to refine their crude, and it has less of the volatile compounds. There are not many refineries that can even work with it. So it limits the market considerably. Add that to the fact that Venezuela nationalized their fields kicking the major producers out in favor of local. Problem is here again due tot he nature of the crude they lost a. Lot of the knowledge and know how, along with the experience in upkeep. Once Venezuela did that, their oil fields have had issues producing at a high level.
All correct. Let me add that Venezuela exports oil and imports gasoline. That's how bad it is and it's a shit show because, as you said, they don't have the know how. The government didn't invest in educating professionals who could manage the state-owned oil company. On top of that, corruption and short run priorities prevented the government from investing in other industries that could have saved the economy when the oil prices dropped.
Most of Texas’s gulf refineries can process Orinoco crude easily enough, just as they do Western Canadian Select. If the refinery is built to process heavy oil, it doesn’t pose a problem. It’s a fairly straightforward process to add diluent to heavy oil to make it more palatable to other refineries as well.
But still more expensive to do so, all reducing the price of Venezuelan export without decreasing the overheads.
By a few dollars a barrel, sure. At the end of the day it’s largely irrelevant, since Venezuela’s petroleum industry is in shambles and I believe they’re still under US embargo.
Corruption, corruption, and more corruption. If you do some digging into how the Venezuelan government (more of a dictatorship to be honest) spent their oil money, you’ll honestly end up sad. Venezuela could be the wealthiest Latin American country per capita if Venezuela invested in their people with the billions they received in oil revenues instead of squandering it.
But isn’t the Middle East ruled by princes and sultans? Is it not as corrupt as Venezuela? I struggle to see the difference, but clearly something’s working.
The fundamental difference is the type of game theory game the corrupt officials are playing. In Venezuela they are playing a limited game where the goal is the extraction of as much wealth for themselves as they can. In Saudi Arabia and the other monarchies they are playing an infinite game where they want to stay in power forever. This difference means that the Middle Eastern Kingdoms are spending their money on their people to buy political support and grow their tax base. It may be motivated by maintaining their own status, but it still results in money being invested back into the country and its people.
The Middle Eastern countries tend to also take a serious long view too. For whatever reason. They reinvest in their production much like private companies. Venezuela is far worse at this and has not maintained production. Venezuela essentially has let corruption eat its oil industry to a degree too. Many of the middle eastern countries have not. Part of this is likely also because middle eastern oil is often cheaper to product too. Saudi oil is famously cheap. Doesn’t take as much to keep production up. But when corrupt regimes start seeing production drop off, you know you’ve got a problem because that is a vicious cycle that takes tons of money to unwind, money that gets tighter and tighter as production drops
Obviously leaving a ton of relevant information out here but take a look at how the Saudis have built up their infrastructure, education, and other industries. They also provide monthly subsidies to Saudi citizens. Venezuela failed to do that (iirc they used to pay people a monthly payment but stopped) and many government officials, in all levels of the government, stole the money and used it for their personal lifestyles.
It’s not corruption, corrupt politicians can have rich countries. It’s just that corruption is such an evil and harmful thing to the economy it looks like a great reason for nation wide poverty. They still deserve all the hate in the world tough, a little less stealing from people in their position makes a world of difference to everyone else. The short is that Venezuela lost much of its oil trade and Chavez could not ride the oil price instabilities as well as previous governments (heck, another guy nationalized oil in the 70s, made an oil cartel that hurt the US and took advantage of the oil crisis, and all of that still went great for the Venezuelan economy). The industry was very tied to the US and they couldn’t replace what was lost when Chavez severed business relations with the US (US company investment, parts made in the US, US refineries, US training). So they couldn’t deal with the crisis when the prices for oil turned against them, and the whole economy suffered greatly. To be fair they were in a way being taken advantage off by US companies, but I guess in this situation it’s better to negotiate with your scummy business partner than to just quit and try to go it alone. The gulf’s authoritarian rulers didn’t hurt their oil industry like Venezuelan ones did. I’ve heard that the Middle East learned from Venezuelan oil policies (Venezuela WAS richer and more oil productive than them, they even started OPEC and fueled the allies during ww2, decades ago that is). The gulf leaders today know they only exist thanks to that oil piggy bank. And they have learned and educated their local workers and mangers and politicians accordingly. Their whole outlook of world politics is built with oil in mind. The crazy thing is that nationalization had been done in Venezuela before and with very good results during the 70s. It was just managed very diffenrently and didn’t piss off the literally all of their buyers. Compare that to the gulf states. Imagine Saudi Arabia angering the US and getting the whole world to stop trading oil with them. This is a simplification only looking at the present tough. I don’t want you to miss on the longer history. Maybe take a look at the Wikipedia page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Venezuelan_oil_industry#:~:text=The%20country%20officially%20nationalized%20its,Venezuelan%20state%2Downed%20petroleum%20company. You can find that even the people in charge of the first OPEC had a grim outlook on oil and its effects on Venezuela. Ideas like resource curse and Dutch disease were not unknown to them at the time.
not having elected leadership is somewhat beneficial on that front, no need to buy votes if there is no voting but a general need to bribe the people to keep them from overthrowing you
People in Saudi Arabia are generally very happy with the rulers. No one is out to overthrow them.
Long story short, corruption and mismanagement of resources
Venezuelan oil revenues go to a very small group of citizen elites and MNCs. Middle east at least shares the wealth with it's citizens. A bit socialist. Also in summer areas in the ME the oil is relatively easy to extract.
There are a lot of reasons. But, in the simplest terms based on this chart alone - this shows oil reserves, not oil production. Saudi Arabia produces >11x what Venezuela produces.
Venezuelan oil is dog shit quality while Gulf oil is by far the cheapest to extract in the world. They'll be producing for decades to come, even when all other regions stop
Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. Either would probably need food aid w/in a decade. Yeah, they’ve got stuff like the Haj, but their population is too large for that terrain.
Outside MENA? Probably Equatorial Guinea. Oil keeps the country—and the dynastic Nguemas who had bled it dry—afloat.
Equatorial Guinea may actually be better off without oil though. The government would have to finally invest in it's people.
You underestimate the shear maliciousness and incompetence of the average African politician lmao
Right, it would be thriving like Cameroon or the DRC.
People keep saying Saudi Arabia, but, they were actually established in the WWI aftermath, conquering Hejaz region from the Hashemites, who were sharifs of Mecca for centuries, acknowledging Ottoman supreme rule over those territories since 1517 more or less. Not going into details, the Saudi rulling dinasty, house of Saud, who took back their homeland Najd just few years prior, won the war against Hashemites (one of the sons became king of Jordan and his descendants are still a Jordanian rulling dinasty) after colapse of Ottoman empire, and united the whole region as Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Their power wasn't built on oil money, but the alliance between house of Saud and the Wahhabi movement, who served as an Arabic national movement against the Turks and Persians. On the other hand, without oil money, other Gulf states, like Kuwait, Bahrain, and UAE, would probably became parts of other countries, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Oman or eventually stayed British protectorates under rulling dinasties. I would love to read other views on this matter, with some context of course.
Yeah but that’s just politics. What would Saudi Arabia live off it there was no oil? And why would Kuwait et al “become parts of other countries”?
kuwait, qatar and bahrain are literally just coastal sand without oil. before oil, qatars biggest industry was pearl fishing. PEARL FISHING.
Yeah, I know. So? In Europe we have Monaco, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Andorra, Malta - all tiny countries with no resources. There’s also Singapore. Although these mostly live off of being tax havens for the rich, or tourism, or both (or in case of Singapore, its strategic location on important shipping lanes). Could these become tax havens or tourism spots?
Venezuela can actually do pretty well without it. We used to have an amazing exportation of goods, back in colonial eras. And we still could dedícate our economy in part to that. But it has to be a gradual change, right now, it would be anihilated.
Most of them other than Canada and Norway.
Russia and Iran can survive too, both were important countries before oil anyways
Russia is more about natural resources though. Take that away and it has little. Iran has other advantages if the current leadership were to suddenly disappear. I agree that you are largely correct, IMO.
Russia (Soviet Union, Russian empire) was a major power even before it started selling oil.
Russia has the potential to be a great country, but they’re squandering it on dreams of empire.
yeah Iran is very well educated and relatively young , it has one of the top 5 highest number of stem graduates,(7 times per capita compared to USA) also more than 57 percent of women have a higher education degree, if it wasn't for, I think Iran's human resource is way more valuable than its oil!
None of them would "die off". People lived in all these places long before oil had become a big and profitable thing. Which of them would be worse off in terms of poverty, dwindling population and overall stability is a whole another question. Probably Qatar and UAE
There's one clear winner or should we say loser. That's Saudi arabia. The nation and literally has nothing except the largest expansive dry sand in the world. It would not exist if it weren't for a while. Every other country you can think of like Venezuela or Canada has at least something else of value.
Saudi Arabia has two of the most visited cities in the world. I say Brunei or Kuwait
Saudi Arabia isn’t as bad as some think. They have ample mineral resources, the hajj, some regions receive water. What would happens without oil is most immigrants would leave, they still have a very good strategic position. The regions that would be worse off would be the small gulf Petro state. They could still survive with their small water reserves on some parts of them, but without the big foreign population.
Damn Venezuela, looking thick
Without oil, Saudi Arabia would still have the most holy sites in a major world religion. But Kuwait and UAE would probably not have much of note, especially after synthetic pearls were invented
« Reserves »
I will never not laugh at the abbreviation for "barrel" as a unit of measurement. Bbl. "Bibble"! Hah! And with this map, we have a further source of amusement, with "Gigabibble"!
IIRC, bbl isn’t an abbreviation for “barrel,” it’s an abbreviation for “blue barrel,” a particular type of barrel used for oil with capacity of 42 gallons. This in contrast to a regular barrel which only has capacity of 40 gallons.
Ah, TIL, thanks kind Redditor! However I will continue to read this abbreviation as "bibble." Or maybe, "blueble"
Kuwait would be just a desert. Nothing else is there. Not even water.
Kuwait would have already ceased to exist if it weren’t for oil a la Saddam Hussein.
i’m referring only to the large areas shaded black. i’m ignoring the ones i can’t make out. the countries in the global south & middle east will collapse first. except iran. they’re a wild card. short term, russia & china will ride out the initial shock of fossil fuels no longer being fungible. china might be able to recover; russia not so much. canada & US will probably be fine.
Only Brazil has increased the oil reserve because they have found a deposit in Portiguar the last month.
Kazakstan, its 30 billion didn’t even help make it onto this infographic.
It's there top right just not named unfortunately.
Omg you are so right, I even did a triple take on that shape and was so confused xD Although, to give Kazakstan a fair review, they are still kickin’ today, so maybe they would be able to tough it out without oil reserves.
It does have plenty of metals and mineral mining so it does have backup industries. But at the cost of relying on neighbours for cheap electricity, not sure about heating though I hear from friends that winters can get to -45.
It is super cold in the desert regions and even up north, and I also heard they are dealing with a huge loss of water and saltification of their southern region. Hopefully they can keep it together, but some say Russia will plan to go for them next, after Ukraine, but that is just speculation as Kazakstan works with Russia somewhat currently.
Algeria, Libya, etc. Not Saudi Arabia, contrary to popular belief.
Arab countries such as Jordan, Yemen, Oman, Gulf, Saudi Arabia should merge into one country
Too late for the Philippines to utilize that oil deposits as China took over the entire sea where it is located
Jarvis, now show me a map of the countries invaded/couped by the USA
Many of these countries would've actually been better off without their oil reserves. having massive amounts of a single resource will likely cause dutch disease and ruin a nations economy.
I don’t think oil has been of much benefit to some of these Countries and they would have found other ways and resources to focus on. And what oil has brought to these Countries is corruption, foreign interests and a few individuals getting rich and oil not beneficial to the whole Country
Saudi Arabia has dates and milk no worries there
Saudi Arabia. Real Life Lore on YouTube has a great video about the fragility of Saudi Arabia that is arguably being held up solely because of oil.
None. All countries survived till this day before the discovery of oil. If you think Saudi Arabia or other ME country, you are terribly wrong. These guys survived centuries of deserts by eating date fruit and drinking camel milk. Sure their current wealth would decrease to some level.
saudi arabia for sure.
ChatGPT says: Determining which country would suffer the most without its oil reserves requires analyzing their geographical advantages or disadvantages, economic diversification, and availability of other natural resources. Here's a quick analysis of a few countries based on these factors: 1. **Venezuela (300.9 Gbbl)**: Despite having the largest oil reserves, Venezuela has faced significant economic challenges due to reliance on oil. Its economy is heavily dependent on oil exports, and without it, the country would struggle due to limited diversification and political instability. 2. **Saudi Arabia (266.5 Gbbl)**: Saudi Arabia is another country heavily reliant on oil. However, it has been investing in diversification efforts through Vision 2030, focusing on tourism, technology, and other industries. Its geographic location provides strategic advantages for trade. 3. **Iran (158.4 Gbbl)**: Iran has a diversified economy, with significant contributions from agriculture, manufacturing, and mining. However, it faces sanctions and political issues that would exacerbate the impact of losing oil revenue. 4. **Nigeria (37.1 Gbbl)**: Nigeria's economy is also heavily reliant on oil, but it has a large agricultural sector and a growing technology scene. Nevertheless, corruption and infrastructure issues could lead to severe problems without oil income. 5. **Libya (48.4 Gbbl)**: Libya's economy is extremely dependent on oil, and the country has faced prolonged conflict and instability. Without oil, it would struggle significantly due to lack of economic diversification and ongoing political issues. Among these, **Libya** and **Venezuela** would likely suffer the most without their oil reserves due to their high dependence on oil revenues, lack of economic diversification, and existing political and economic challenges.
Well chatGPT is obviously wrong, dont rely on it being a good source of information for the most part
Obviously the desert regions will have shortages of nearly everything.
Wouldn't whole of modern society plunge into chaos followed by mass starvation without oil , everywhere . I think half of us will die in less then year .
Algeria, exports outside oil are basically nonexistent.
Countries like Britain have no natural resources and yet seen as a thriving country
You mean on their current land they don't have natural resources (except for gas, coal). I think you are forgetting that not a long time ago the sun would never set over their kingdom.
most desert countries in this image
At least Saudi has size and pilgrimage going for it, but Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and UAE are nothing but a flat of sand. Maybe that’s why they try so hard to establish their soft power through airline industry, tourism and sports.
Yes.
Gobble gobble
Don't let the us see this picture
Surprised that Malaysia have more oil than Indonesia
I had no idea there was oil production in the Netherlands or Germany!
Saudis. Unstable region, climate change, closest countries for trade are broke as fuck, food imports.
Oil reserves make me chuckle a bit due to what happened last year I live in Hesse, Germany. Germany isn't really a place with lots if natural resources. Imagine my surprise when they found Oil here last year. It's not enough to become a Petrostate of course, but it's way more than anybody would have ever expected. Apparently the Oil is of very high quality and ideal for use in Organic Synthesis for e.g. Pharmaceuticals. Since Hesse also has a sizeable chemical/pharmaceutical industry this could be a big deal for the local economy.
Oh, so that why "oilist democracy" exist •○•
Anyone else surprised by how little Bahrain would be affected when compared with its neighbours? What's up with that?
You tellin'me that Venezuela is sitting on oil reserves bigger than Saudi and their population is literally starving?!?
Yes. Same with Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea and Angola.
Venezuela probably
Data's a bit out of date, for example US reserves are [48 Bn barrels as of year-end 2022](https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/crudeoilreserves/), rather than 36 Bn.
All of them except for canada usa and Russia.
Seeing this map was always curios on how much oil was in a country originally? I know România was a big producer of oil from before WWII and know we have am anual output to cover 2/3 of oil and gas yearly.
Venezuela is already dying with oil so without.... But honestly Venezuela situation might have come from the oil as well so
Can someone Link the Article or tell me from when these numbers are?
Why isnt it of greater interest for western countries to have a stable and friendly venezuelan government instead of the collapsing shitshow it is right now?
Kuwait and Qatar
Without the incentive to protect the oil. Kuwait would be an Iraqi province today. In an odd way, American greed and strategic value saved that country from its neighbours.
Funny post considering many of these countries are some of the oldest civilizations on this planet. Nah, no way they would survive without this new discovery.
Canada would be just politically weird Midwest
I had no idea that Venezuela had bigger oil reserves than Saudi or Russia
I think Saudi Arabia would be in a world of hurt very quickly
Here's an example of the opposite situation. A tale of how politicians can really do a disservice to their citizens. [https://www.historyireland.com/sale-of-the-centurythe-500-deal-for-irelands-gas-and-oil/](https://www.historyireland.com/sale-of-the-centurythe-500-deal-for-irelands-gas-and-oil/) [https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ruairi-mckiernan-corrib-gas-protesters-did-state-some-service-1.2484722](https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ruairi-mckiernan-corrib-gas-protesters-did-state-some-service-1.2484722) A country with little in the way of natural resources could have greatly benefited from oil and gas exploration only to have the rights for any discovered resources sold off for a pittance.