In pursuit of non-Russian hydrocarbons, U.S. and European officials
have come calling at the usual destinations, Riyadh, Doha, and Abu
Dhabi, and some less traveled, including Algiers and even Caracas. So
far, they have not appeared in Tehran. The holder of the world’s
second-largest gas reserves, and one of the few countries with
substantial spare oil production capacity, seems like an obvious
destination – with equally obvious demerits.
Negotiations continue in Vienna over a U.S. reentry into the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal, from which the administration
of former President Donald J. Trump withdrew in May 2018. After recent
progress, the talks stalled over a last-minute demand from Russia for
sanctions exemptions. Since that was apparently resolved, Washington has
faced the thorny issue of Iran’s demand for the United States to lift the designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization.
But if the stringent sanctions on Iran are lifted, would it really make a difference in the current oil balance?
Estimates of Iranian oil exports and storage vary widely because of
shipments ostensibly from Oman and Malaysia going to China, but in fact
originating from Iran. Iran may have up to 90 million barrels of crude
and condensate (a light oil derivative of natural gas) stored on land in
its territory, at sea, and in tanks in China, enough to add about 1
million barrels per day to the market for three months.
It would take Iran a few months to gear up to full pre-sanctions
crude output of 3.8 mb/d, of which around 2 mb/d would be available for
exportation (after meeting domestic demand), though it would probably
get there more quickly than most analysts expect. The Iranians already
went through such a restart process following the original 2015 JCPOA,
and production was close to pre-sanctions levels within three months.
That would boost Iran’s overall exports by 1.2 mb/d to 1.4 mb/d. Only
two other OPEC members, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, have
comparable or larger spare capacity. The International Energy Agency has
suggested Russia’s production could fall by 3 mb/d in April due to
sanctions and buyer aversion. Therefore, while Iran’s full return would
not totally compensate, it would be a major contribution.
Iran plans to spend $90 billion to reach 5 mb/d capacity over the
coming decade. That would see it keep pace with the UAE, falling behind
only Saudi Arabia and Iraq in OPEC. There is a long list of fields that
could be developed or expanded, notably the West Karun fields near the
Iraqi border (including the Yadavaran, Yaran, Azadegan, Darquain, and
Jufeyr fields), the large claimed “Namavaran” heavy oil find, also in
Khuzestan province, and the South Pars oil layer offshore, which overlies the gas reservoir and extends into the Qatari section (the large Al Shaheen oil field).
Such new oil developments will rely mostly on domestic companies,
which would have freer access to finance and technology, assuming
sanctions are lifted. European companies would be slow to return under
the double threat of another U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA after the
2024 presidential election and Iranian bureaucracy, political
indecision, and unattractive investment terms. The Russians will not
have capital or focus for any oil production effort in Iran. That would
leave the Chinese companies, such as Sinopec and the China National
Petroleum Corporation, which have engaged substantially in the past. So
realistically, in a post-sanctions world, and after reattaining current
maximum capacity, Iran’s oil capacity would from then on edge up
gradually – a counterweight to falling Russian output but just one part
of filling the deficit.
Gas is a different story. Iran exports significant volumes to Turkey
and Iraq, but supplies have been erratic due to domestic shortages.
Increasing reliable sales to Turkey could displace Russian gas there,
save on liquefied natural gas imports, and allow other gas in Turkey to
flow into southeastern Europe, which would help European energy security
objectives. Russia has for some time, therefore, quietly pursued
approaches to neutralize large-scale Iranian gas exports.
Lifting sanctions would help Iran’s gas sector immediately in two
ways. First, it would eliminate restrictions on the marketing of
condensate, for which Iran has at times run out of storage. Second, it
would allow the purchase of compression equipment, badly needed at the
colossal South Pars field (the Iranian section of what Qatar calls the
North Field), where production will otherwise decline rapidly after 2023
as pressure in the reservoir depletes due to extraction of the gas.
As with oil, more substantial gains will take longer. In 2021, Mohsen
Khojastehmehr, managing director of the National Iranian Oil Company, revealed plans
to invest $70 billion to add 23 billion cubic feet per day to
production capacity by 2030, 20.6 bcf/d of which would come from new
field developments. Iran also flares (burns off) about 1.4 bcf/d of
unwanted gas from oil production, which could be saved.
The supply-demand deficit in winter, when Iran runs short of gas for home heating, is estimated
at 7 bcf/d and is projected to increase to 12 bcf/d by 2030. The
planned production increase would therefore meet all domestic demand and
boost exports by about 11 bcf/d. On an annual basis, this equates to
more than half of all the gas Europe imports from Russia. This would
exceed even the expected export increases by the United States and
Qatar, the other two heavyweights in gas export growth, over this
period. In March, the National Iranian Oil Company invited investors to
provide proposals for building small-scale LNG units, without giving
more specifics.
The relaxation of sanctions would also help tackle Iran’s runaway
domestic gas consumption by allowing investment in energy efficiency and
solar and wind power, which hardly feature in its electricity generation mix
today despite excellent natural resources. On the other hand, a slate
of half-finished gas-based industrial plants would be completed, pushing
up demand in this sector.
These gas production ambitions, however, have to be assessed with
skepticism. As with oil, international investment is likely to be slow
and halting and viewed with suspicion and obstructionism from parts of
the Iranian system. In its best year historically, 2018, when it was
finally catching up on the development of South Pars, Iran added 1.76
bcf/d of production. It would need to gain 3.3 bcf/d every year
from 2023 to 2030 to reach its goals, from a standing start. Massive
new pipeline capacity would be required to reach Turkey and Europe,
Oman, Pakistan, and whichever other nearby markets were targeted. Or,
Iran would need to build an LNG industry bigger than Qatar’s, the
long-time world leader in LNG exports, in seven years.
This is unfeasible even in a much more attractive investment
environment, given the likely prohibitive costs and challenging
investment conditions for ramping up piped or LNG capacity. So, while
Iran might moderately boost exports to Turkey, and perhaps even start up
some modest LNG sales, by 2030, it will only be a small part of
Europe’s solution to the Russian problem. If Iran does become a large
international gas player, it would be closer to 2040 and more oriented
to South Asia.
Of course, a revived deal with Iran solves some energy problems but
raises others. Notably, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have been reluctant to
unleash their own spare oil production capacity. Partly this might be
reasonable caution – firm evidence of disruption of Russian supplies is
taking time to emerge, and the possibility of Iran’s return has to be
accounted for in market balances.
But Saudi Arabia and the UAE have made their displeasure with the
United States’ Middle East policy clear. The Saudi Ministry of Energy announced
that the kingdom was not responsible for any shortage in global crude
supplies while the Iran-linked Houthi forces in Yemen continue to attack
its energy infrastructure.
On March 25, a missile and drone attack set fire to Saudi Aramco oil
storage tanks in Jeddah. And, in September 2019, a carefully calibrated
strike briefly knocked out some 5.7 mb/d of Saudi oil capacity at the
key Abqaiq processing facility and Khurais oil field. A similar
disruption today would wreak havoc on a tense oil market.
For the administration of President Joseph R. Biden Jr., this appears
to argue for de-escalation between the United States and Iran, and
between Tehran and its Gulf neighbors, to free Washington to tackle
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression without the risk of
concurrent crises. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, though, fear unleashed
Iranian adventurism and the lack of an explicit U.S. security provision,
possibly with more serious strikes against oil and gas infrastructure
in the Gulf Arab states.
As with U.S. engagement with the regime in Venezuela, necessity makes
some strange bedfellows. A post-sanctions Iran would be an important
part of replacing Russian hydrocarbons – but its limited impact just
emphasizes the scale of the task. A revived JCPOA would untangle some
energy knots while tightening others.