“They will damage the surface reservoir,” he said.
“Ultimately, both sides will lose because overall there will be less oil produced.”
Mr Takin said in his report that he had proposed a bilateral solution.
“The obvious thing is to do joint development: unitisation. This is standard practice all over the world,” he said. “It’s the optimal way to develop the field for conservation.”
A border that was agreed to by the UN in 1993 and formally accepted by Iraq in 1994 is still the cause of friction with Iraqi politicians, and the issue could complicate the efforts of international advisers to allocate resources from cross-border oilfields.
Other issues that cause tension between the two countries include billions of dollars in outstanding loans and war reparations owed by Iraq, the identification and repatriation of citizens who died as a result of the occupation, and the return of stolen documents.
Even if Iraq does not to sign the agreement, it is pushing ahead with plans to develop its southern oilfields, including Rumaila, which is the country’s largest and thought to hold 17 billion barrels.
Baghdad has stated its intention of increasing production within six years to as much as 12 million barrels per day (bpd) from about 2.5 million bpd today.
BP, China National Petroleum Corporation and Iraq’s state-owned South Oil Company recently announced that they would drill as many as 100 wells by the end of next year to increase Rumaila’s production by about 10 per cent to 1.1 million bpd.
Other deals are expected to boost production at West Qurna and Zubair oilfields, which are also in the country’s south.
Mr Takin said the agreement described by Sheikh Ahmed appeared to be the best solution for both countries.
“If they do it this way, both sides will win,” he said. “They will maximise the oil that both sides can take.”
(Source: The National)
(Photo: Kuwait National Petroleum Company (KNPC) HQ. Credit: 'radiant guy')
Comments are closed.