Varun Sivaram

Energy, Security, and Climate

CFR experts examine the science and foreign policy surrounding climate change, energy, and nuclear security.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Is China the Real Winner from Iraq’s Oil Boom?

by Michael Levi
June 4, 2013


Iraqi oil production has boomed in recent years, and Chinese companies have been deeply involved in producing and buying the oil. That prompted headline writers to go with this for a New York Times story on Sunday: “China Is Reaping Biggest Benefits of Iraq Oil Boom”. There’s a lot of good stuff in the article, but the headline rests on a wrongheaded view of how oil trade is intertwined with countries’ economic fortunes. Indeed one could easily argue that the United States, not China, has been the biggest winner (aside from Iraq) from the surge in Iraqi supplies.

Every major country is involved in international oil markets in two ways: through its companies’ production activities overseas and through its consumption of imported oil. Chinese companies have done well in Iraq in substantial part because they’ve been willing to invest in oil production projects without taking an equity stake (or some approximation of that) in the fields involved; Western majors, in contrast, tend to be averse to that sort of arrangement. It’s difficult to estimate how much money Chinese companies are making from that role, but you can put an upper bound on it. It’s rare to hear of companies charging Baghdad more than a couple dollars a barrel to develop Iraqi oil (and numbers are often lower, particularly once you subtract costs). Now assume that Chinese companies are producing half of Iraq’s oil, i.e. about 1.5 million barrels a day – likely a very large overestimate but still useful for setting an upper bound on Chinese profits. That would yield a profit of about a billion dollars a year.

But China and the United States also benefit from Iraqi production as consumers. Let’s say Iraqi production is a million barrels a day higher than it would otherwise have been. And assume a fairly high long-run elasticity of oil demand of -0.25. Then added Iraqi production should have reduced world oil prices by around four dollars a barrel. Now let’s cut that by three-quarters to account for countervailing moves by other producers that may have balanced off the Iraqi increase, and say that Iraqi production has lowered world prices by just one dollar a barrel. This is a modest estimate of the possible Iraqi price impact.

In 2010, China imported 4.8 million barrels of oil a day, while the United States imported 9.2 million. If oil prices were a dollar a barrel lower as a result of increased Iraqi production, the United States benefited to the tune of nearly $3.4 billion a year as a result. China, by contrast, benefited by only $1.8 billion.

Juxtapose this with the estimates for production profits and it’s pretty easy to see how the United States could well have benefited even more than China from the boom in Iraqi oil production. (And that’s ignoring profits that U.S. firms, including service companies, are realizing in Iraq.)

This carries a broader lesson: It’s critical to think separately about countries as oil producers and oil consumers. Muddling the two together typically leads to confusion.

Post a Comment 4 Comments

  • Posted by jh

    Thanks Michael, top notch back-of-the-envelope work!

  • Posted by CharlieSeattle

    You forgot to subtract the costs of the last Iraq war and occupation incurred by the US since Bush blew the 5.4 Trillion dollar Clinton surplus 5 times over.

  • Posted by Jonathan


    We spend a trillion dollars. More. More than a thousand billion.
    China spends nothing.

    Our supposed hypothetical benefit from Iraqi oil in the world market is 3.8 billion per year. We have about 250 years to make back the financial cost.

    China wins in year 1.

    The neocons were wrong to the point of criminality. Treasonous criminality.

  • Posted by Nagesh K Ojha

    China has passed the U.S. in December 2012 to become the world’s leading importer of oil; though the domestic production of the U.S. played a crucial role in this scenario when North Dakota, Ohio and Pennsylvania together produced 1.5 million b/d oil, i.e. more than Iran exported (Engel & Windrem 2013). In spite of all this, how can we deny the role of Iraqi oil? For China, getting oil is more important than Yergin’s ‘affordable prices’ or profit and lose in its energy strategy.

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required