USGS Announces Largest Continuous Oil Assessment in Texas and New Mexico

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

How on earth did I miss this report from the U.S. Geological Survey / U.S. Department of the Interior?

USGS Announces Largest Continuous Oil Assessment in Texas and New Mexico

USGS Identifies Largest Continuous Oil and Gas Resource Potential Ever

Release Date: NOVEMBER 28, 2018

Estimates Include 46.3 Billion Barrels of Oil, 281 Trillion Cubic feet of Natural Gas, and 20 Billion Barrels of Natural Gas Liquids in Texas and New Mexico’s Wolfcamp Shale and Bone Spring Formation.

WASHINGTON - Today, the U.S. Department of the Interior announced the Wolfcamp Shale and overlying Bone Spring Formation in the Delaware Basin portion of Texas and New Mexico’s Permian Basin province contain an estimated mean of 46.3 billion barrels of oil, 281 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 20 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, according to an assessment by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This estimate is for continuous (unconventional) oil, and consists of undiscovered, technically recoverable resources.

"Christmas came a few weeks early this year," said U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. "American strength flows from American energy, and as it turns out, we have a lot of American energy. Before this assessment came down, I was bullish on oil and gas production in the United States. Now, I know for a fact that American energy dominance is within our grasp as a nation."

[Rodent + 1,424]

2 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

How on earth did I miss this report from the U.S. Geological Survey / U.S. Department of the Interior?

USGS Announces Largest Continuous Oil Assessment in Texas and New Mexico

USGS Identifies Largest Continuous Oil and Gas Resource Potential Ever

Release Date: NOVEMBER 28, 2018

Estimates Include 46.3 Billion Barrels of Oil, 281 Trillion Cubic feet of Natural Gas, and 20 Billion Barrels of Natural Gas Liquids in Texas and New Mexico’s Wolfcamp Shale and Bone Spring Formation.

WASHINGTON - Today, the U.S. Department of the Interior announced the Wolfcamp Shale and overlying Bone Spring Formation in the Delaware Basin portion of Texas and New Mexico’s Permian Basin province contain an estimated mean of 46.3 billion barrels of oil, 281 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 20 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, according to an assessment by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This estimate is for continuous (unconventional) oil, and consists of undiscovered, technically recoverable resources.

"Christmas came a few weeks early this year," said U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. "American strength flows from American energy, and as it turns out, we have a lot of American energy. Before this assessment came down, I was bullish on oil and gas production in the United States. Now, I know for a fact that American energy dominance is within our grasp as a nation."

I don't understand the release date for that report. it says Nov 28 but it's Facebook page says today it just released the report today. reuters has it covered today too, citing the "Thursday" report. wasssuuup?

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

21 minutes ago, Rodent said:

I don't understand the release date for that report. it says Nov 28 but it's Facebook page says today it just released the report today. reuters has it covered today too, citing the "Thursday" report. wasssuuup?

The pdf report is dated "December".

https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2018/3073/fs20183073.pdf

[Illurion + 894]

It is good news nonetheless.

[Mike Shellman + 548]

It is essentially meaningless news when one considers the USGS assumes all Delaware Basin benches are one big homogenous reservoir, they estimate drainage in number of acres per well per bench then divide that by hundreds of square miles in the Delaware Basin and come up with 46.3G BO. No two shale oil wells are the same and no part of the Wolfcamp or Bone Springs is homogenous. The USGS qualifies its study by stating these are theoretical, as yet undiscovered, technically recoverable reserves at some unknown oil price that will make them economical to produce someday in the future.  Americans, however, are essentially dancing in the streets. It was hard to determine today which bit of hyped up news made American's dance more, this USGS stuff or the fact that based on weekly statistical data one time exports exceeded one time import levels. Lets see how THAT turns out in a few months.  

The US shale oil industry has drilled nearly 70,000 wells in America's shale basins the past decade. Its wrung almost 10G BO out of that lousy rock. It owes something like $300 billion dollars and is struggling to pay that back. Now, at $50 oil ($43 in the Delaware Basin) it will struggle even more. So, it has not even paid for what its already produced... where in the world is all the money going to come from to extract all this magical USGS oil? Heaven?

https://www.oilystuffblog.com/single-post/2018/12/06/Shale-Oil-Keeps-Growing-on-Trees

America needs to get a grip and quit believing all the hooyey it reads on the internet. How much longer can the shale oil industry keep delivering the 'goods'...on credit?

 

 

Edited December 7, 2018 by Mike Shellman

[Karl V + 33]

Since the oil is pumped even below $10 , it seems , that even $10 is worth pumping ...

[Andrew Sun + 17]

4 hours ago, Mike Shellman said:

America needs to get a grip and quit believing all the hooyey it reads on the internet. How much longer can the shale oil industry keep delivering the 'goods'...on credit?

What would it take for the main stream media and main stream commentators to see the fact that the average shale production is talking place on credit and the probability for the creditor to get return on investment isn't very high at the current oil prices?

Much higher interest rate from the Federal Reserve? Some kind of credit or liquidity crisis or shock in the financial market like what we experienced in 2008-2009? Or something else?

Edited December 8, 2018 by Andrew Sun

[ronwagn + 6,290]

 

The oil and natural gas will be tapped when we need it badly enough to pay the requisite price. 

[Mike Shellman + 548]

Americans need jobs and the shale oil and gas industry is providing those jobs. Consumers enjoy cheap(er) gasoline and fuel oil, etc. and the shale industry is providing that. American's loathe OPEC and want desperately to be shed of them forever and they think, incorrectly, that the shale industry will do that for them. Americans are not adverse to debt; household debt is at an all time high and our nation's debt to GDP ratio is on the top 10 world worse list. They don't understand how the oil industry works, they think we all make money hand over fist and being $300 billion in debt is nothing. Americans only like good news. The seek out good news and read and listen to stuff they want to that confirms their belief system. American's don't save for the future (google it) and struggle to think past next week. I don't know what will change that regarding the shale oil industry...it will take a really big one to go bankrupt maybe. But I am not sure the government can now allow that to happen. The shale industry is too big, and too important to fail. It is in a sense, a giant redistribution of "wealth."

The oil industry in America will indeed be drained within 10 years. What will be left will be even more expensive to extract and less profitable, if that is possible. Wasting associated gas up a flare stack so that we can export our last remaining oil resources to Asia is short sighted, poorly managed idealism about now being more important than tomorrow. When shale oil is gone, that's it. Then we will begging the rest of the world, the world we are now politically pissing off, for its oil. Again. We will be on our hands and knees. If we can get that oil it will be incredible expensive.

Mike Shellman

 

 

 

[Billyjack + 58]

The original study released last year by the USGS declared that there were 20 billion barrels recoverable from the Wolfcamp. I have drilled and completed wells in the Wolfcamp Carbonate(not a shale). The study by the USGS indicates that roughly 200,000 wells that are 1 mile horizontal will be required to produce the oil. That will be around $5 million per well or $1 trillion. This estimate does not include lease bonuses to the royalty owners of at least $1000/acre and will will take at least 160 acres per well. The oil revenues will also be reduced by royalty payments of around 25% and the severance taxes to the state of 4.62% and then the operating costs to pump the wells lets say 10% of revenues. This means that the breakeven costs will be around $80/bbl. Finally, these type wells have historically declined rapidly and then produce 5 to 10 bopd for 30 years(in a horizontal I expect this to be 50 to 100 bopd). To produce "stripper" wells requires pumping at the formation depths to produce. There does not exist a pumping mechanism that can be set in a deviated hole that will not fail rapidly.   

[TXPower + 643]

I’m not too worried, I’ve read on this very forum that sustainable energy is on the cusp of making Dino Juice, well, a dinosaur.  We will always have debt among us.  Until then eat, frac and be merry.

[Happy Go Lucky + 25]

12 hours ago, ronwagn said:

 

The oil and natural gas will be tapped when we need it badly enough to pay the requisite price. 

Shades of Three Days of The Condor

Higgins: It's simple economics. Today it's oil, right? In ten or fifteen years, food. Plutonium. Maybe even sooner. Now, what do you think the people are gonna want us to do then?

Joe Turner: Ask them?

Higgins: Not now - then! Ask 'em when they're running out. Ask 'em when there's no heat in their homes and they're cold. Ask 'em when their engines stop. Ask 'em when people who have never known hunger start going hungry. You wanna know something? They won't want us to ask 'em. They'll just want us to get it for 'em!

[ronwagn + 6,290]

We are living in a new age with a superabundance of energy. We have a superabundance of fossil fuels. Add ethanol, other biofuels, wind, solar, and nuclear. Running out of energy would only occur due to political obstruction, socialism, regional conflicts or wars. Energy will become cheaper and more available for the Third World. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

9 hours ago, Mike Shellman said:

Americans need jobs and the shale oil and gas industry is providing those jobs. Consumers enjoy cheap(er) gasoline and fuel oil, etc. and the shale industry is providing that. American's loathe OPEC and want desperately to be shed of them forever and they think, incorrectly, that the shale industry will do that for them. Americans are not adverse to debt; household debt is at an all time high and our nation's debt to GDP ratio is on the top 10 world worse list. They don't understand how the oil industry works, they think we all make money hand over fist and being $300 billion in debt is nothing. Americans only like good news. The seek out good news and read and listen to stuff they want to that confirms their belief system. American's don't save for the future (google it) and struggle to think past next week. I don't know what will change that regarding the shale oil industry...it will take a really big one to go bankrupt maybe. But I am not sure the government can now allow that to happen. The shale industry is too big, and too important to fail. It is in a sense, a giant redistribution of "wealth."

The oil industry in America will indeed be drained within 10 years. What will be left will be even more expensive to extract and less profitable, if that is possible. Wasting associated gas up a flare stack so that we can export our last remaining oil resources to Asia is short sighted, poorly managed idealism about now being more important than tomorrow. When shale oil is gone, that's it. Then we will begging the rest of the world, the world we are now politically pissing off, for its oil. Again. We will be on our hands and knees. If we can get that oil it will be incredible expensive.

Mike Shellman

 

 

 

We are discovering more oil and natural gas all the time. New estimates in the Permian are just one example. Natural gas is so abundant that it could take over if oil runs out. That is not even including ocean methane hydrates which are not yet mined. Instead, oilmen are flaring natural gas because they are allowed to waste much of this valuable natural resource. 

[Mike Shellman + 548]

The only significant worldwide oil discovery I am aware of in the past six years is off Guyana. Guessing at shale oil resources over a vast area the size of the Delaware Basin does not constitute an era of superabundant fossil fuels; those resources aren't called hypothetical, possible, technically recoverable for nothing. 

 

If you dream of a world of abundant hydrocarbons; keep dreaming. And get your check book ready.

 

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Read and learn https://geology.com/articles/methane-hydrates/

[Sebastian Meana + 278]

One of the problems that i kinda have with the mentioning of shale oil reserves is when they confuse tight oil with oil shale, they seem the same thing but they are not the same

Tight oil is actual oil and gas contained in the micro-pores of the shale rock, how much is there it depends on the geology of the rock, and how good is the tech you have to get it, you crack the rock and oil and gas flow from it.

Oil shale is a compound that has been there for million or even billions of years but hasn't become oil yet, and it has a compound called kerogen, in order to extract methane or light crude from oil shale is necessary to heat it up, the reserves of kerogen oil are potentially ginormous, 45 trillion barrels in the US. The problem is extracting it, because you have to heat the rock and not only crack it.

the "best" way to get real and true shale oil is by making parallel wells around pre-existing tight oil fracked wells, and in the parallel wells infecting Supercritical CO2 at like 500C or 600C so the kerogen becomes methane and oil, or by inserting microwave antennas that make the oil and gas boil and make possible to be pumped out.

in the Case of supercritical CO2 kerogen oil recovery the oil and gas dissolves in the CO2, then you condense the co2, filter it put it again in the compressor, and inject it again in the parallel well.

the problem is that either is microwave or S-Co2 it consumes power like crazy, the united states would need 180GW of power in order to produce the 18,000,000Bbl/Day it consumes, but anyway it could produce a barrell at around 15U$S to 20U$S, supposing we use nuclear reactors to generate electricity

[NWMan + 89]

Very impressed with the realism of the people who have posted here but there must be a reason why America continues to produce and sell oil at a loss.  The only viable reason, I can see is that the largest consumer of oil has managed to suppress the price of oil over the last 4 years by convincing American traders that 3 to 4 million barrels of unprofitable oil is actually the worlds swing producer.  I know this is a major conspiracy theory where American investor are lending money to a loss making activity to obtain cheap oil to boost the American economy and therefore the American stock market but what other explanation is there for producing oil at a loss!!!!

 

[Rodent + 1,424]

3 minutes ago, NWMan said:

Very impressed with the realism of the people who have posted here but there must be a reason why America continues to produce and sell oil at a loss.  The only viable reason, I can see is that the largest consumer of oil has managed to suppress the price of oil over the last 4 years by convincing American traders that 3 to 4 million barrels of unprofitable oil is actually the worlds swing producer.  I know this is a major conspiracy theory where American investor are lending money to a loss making activity to obtain cheap oil to boost the American economy and therefore the American stock market but what other explanation is there for producing oil at a loss!!!!

 

oh, well it's not really a loss per se. until loans are called and can't be paid. if someone gives me $1000000 to use so that I can pump oil and sell it, as long as my loan payment doesn't exceed what I'm bringing in for selling the oil, my company can still be "making money". it's only a loss if I put up my own million dollars or if my loan is called. 

Im no economics or accounting major, but that makes sense to me. 

someone else may have a more educated take on that. 

 

[NWMan + 89]

If I went to investment bank with a business proposal that ultimately "lost money" I would be shown the door, but American investment funds continue to fund shale oil on a grand scale.  They know it is loss making yet they continue.  The only point I am trying to make or question is, does anyone know why?  There must be something in it for them!

[Bhimsen Pachawry + 72]

On 12/8/2018 at 5:30 PM, Mike Shellman said:

Americans need jobs and the shale oil and gas industry is providing those jobs. Consumers enjoy cheap(er) gasoline and fuel oil, etc. and the shale industry is providing that. American's loathe OPEC and want desperately to be shed of them forever and they think, incorrectly, that the shale industry will do that for them. Americans are not adverse to debt; household debt is at an all time high and our nation's debt to GDP ratio is on the top 10 world worse list. They don't understand how the oil industry works, they think we all make money hand over fist and being $300 billion in debt is nothing. Americans only like good news. The seek out good news and read and listen to stuff they want to that confirms their belief system. American's don't save for the future (google it) and struggle to think past next week. I don't know what will change that regarding the shale oil industry...it will take a really big one to go bankrupt maybe. But I am not sure the government can now allow that to happen. The shale industry is too big, and too important to fail. It is in a sense, a giant redistribution of "wealth."

The oil industry in America will indeed be drained within 10 years. What will be left will be even more expensive to extract and less profitable, if that is possible. Wasting associated gas up a flare stack so that we can export our last remaining oil resources to Asia is short sighted, poorly managed idealism about now being more important than tomorrow. When shale oil is gone, that's it. Then we will begging the rest of the world, the world we are now politically pissing off, for its oil. Again. We will be on our hands and knees. If we can get that oil it will be incredible expensive.

Mike Shellman

 

 

 

 

On 12/9/2018 at 3:25 AM, ronwagn said:

We are living in a new age with a superabundance of energy. We have a superabundance of fossil fuels. Add ethanol, other biofuels, wind, solar, and nuclear. Running out of energy would only occur due to political obstruction, socialism, regional conflicts or wars. Energy will become cheaper and more available for the Third World. 

 

4 hours ago, Sebastian Meana said:

One of the problems that i kinda have with the mentioning of shale oil reserves is when they confuse tight oil with oil shale, they seem the same thing but they are not the same

Tight oil is actual oil and gas contained in the micro-pores of the shale rock, how much is there it depends on the geology of the rock, and how good is the tech you have to get it, you crack the rock and oil and gas flow from it.

Oil shale is a compound that has been there for million or even billions of years but hasn't become oil yet, and it has a compound called kerogen, in order to extract methane or light crude from oil shale is necessary to heat it up, the reserves of kerogen oil are potentially ginormous, 45 trillion barrels in the US. The problem is extracting it, because you have to heat the rock and not only crack it.

the "best" way to get real and true shale oil is by making parallel wells around pre-existing tight oil fracked wells, and in the parallel wells infecting Supercritical CO2 at like 500C or 600C so the kerogen becomes methane and oil, or by inserting microwave antennas that make the oil and gas boil and make possible to be pumped out.

in the Case of supercritical CO2 kerogen oil recovery the oil and gas dissolves in the CO2, then you condense the co2, filter it put it again in the compressor, and inject it again in the parallel well.

the problem is that either is microwave or S-Co2 it consumes power like crazy, the united states would need 180GW of power in order to produce the 18,000,000Bbl/Day it consumes, but anyway it could produce a barrell at around 15U$S to 20U$S, supposing we use nuclear reactors to generate electricity

 

4 hours ago, NWMan said:

Very impressed with the realism of the people who have posted here but there must be a reason why America continues to produce and sell oil at a loss.  The only viable reason, I can see is that the largest consumer of oil has managed to suppress the price of oil over the last 4 years by convincing American traders that 3 to 4 million barrels of unprofitable oil is actually the worlds swing producer.  I know this is a major conspiracy theory where American investor are lending money to a loss making activity to obtain cheap oil to boost the American economy and therefore the American stock market but what other explanation is there for producing oil at a loss!!!!

 

 

4 hours ago, Rodent said:

oh, well it's not really a loss per se. until loans are called and can't be paid. if someone gives me $1000000 to use so that I can pump oil and sell it, as long as my loan payment doesn't exceed what I'm bringing in for selling the oil, my company can still be "making money". it's only a loss if I put up my own million dollars or if my loan is called. 

Im no economics or accounting major, but that makes sense to me. 

someone else may have a more educated take on that. 

 

You all are missing a big point here- Petroleum has no price. It is a natural resource and can't be assigned a price. It is critical to function industrial economy. USA consumed 20.7MBPD oil and it has no choice but to get it somewhere. Whatever loss the shale oil companies undergo is much less than the loss to the economy if the oil is not produced. Hence, govt is willing to subsidise the shale production to ensure that shale oil production is kept going.

About why USA is producing that heavily relies on the political reason behind it. USA used to import oil from Arab countries who sided with USA in 1970s and agreed for petrodollar arrangement, thus making USA world power and allowing USA to buy oil by simply printing dollars. In return, USA agreed to protect Arab countries, sell weapons and "spread Islam" while ensuring that Arab countries are made defacto leaders of Islam. The USSR which was atheist had deislamised lot of regions like Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan etc and were expanding. This alarmed the Arabs and the alliance with USA was forged. USSR was taken down by Arabs pumping oil in record volume since 1985, thus bringing down USSR economy and simultaneously waging wars on multiple fronts.

But recently, the Arabs realised that USA was taking advantage of its dollars and misusing its powers to steal Arab oil. The movements like Arab Spring sponsored by USA enraged Arabs. Iraq invasion was also despised as an attempt to steal Arab oil. The high current account deficit of USA and arbitrary printing of dollars made the value of dollar diminish. So, they threatened USA that they will withdraw from petrodollars if USA buys oil using the dollar it prints. So, USA is forced to be independent in oil needs and is not able to import it except from countries which are politically close to USA like Canada which is considered as countries under USA sphere of influence.

The USA oil production is a measure of desperation rather than based on so called "free market"

[NWMan + 89]

Thanks you for this explanation.  It obviously implies a measure of state control which America always denies, in that they claim their production is driven by free economic forces. 

It will be interesting when they try and take OPEC to court for manipulating the oil price. 

I was told that Saddam's biggest crime was that he started to sell oil in Euros and therefore he had to go.

If American oil is to be produced at a loss for the good of the state them we have almost turned full circle because it used to be Russia who drilled thousands of well to recover as must oil as technically possible with no economic limit.

[Bhimsen Pachawry + 72]

4 hours ago, NWMan said:

Thanks you for this explanation.  It obviously implies a measure of state control which America always denies, in that they claim their production is driven by free economic forces. 

It will be interesting when they try and take OPEC to court for manipulating the oil price. 

I was told that Saddam's biggest crime was that he started to sell oil in Euros and therefore he had to go.

If American oil is to be produced at a loss for the good of the state them we have almost turned full circle because it used to be Russia who drilled thousands of well to recover as must oil as technically possible with no economic limit.

USA always controls everything politically and only does gimmicks to appear "capitalist" so as to have excuses whenever it is not convenient. USA makes treaties like giving duty free imports to certain countries in return for providing permission to set up military base or other political favours, increases or decreases taxes to regulate goods, puts "environmental restrictions" to curb certain activities etc to enforce state control. For example, the permian shale had lot of area under "environmental restrictions" to conserve oil in 1980s - 90s but now these are free to be drilled!

USA can't sue OPEC as USA's petrodollar depends on political alliance, not on "free-market". So, any withdrawal from petrodollar alliance will doom USA. If USA wants dollars to be used for trade, they must keep their mouth shut. Suing OPEC is never an option.

Saddam's crime was going for Euro and also having bad fate. Demented Khomeini started a war with Iraq by calling for revolution against Saddam by Iraqis. For all practical purpose, Saddam hated USA and would have made good allies with Iran had Khomeini been more reasonable. But Khomeini was demented and despite Saddam being very welcoming to Iranian revolution, Khomeini declared war on Saddam. This ruined Iraq massively and put Iraq under debt. At the same time, USA persuaded Saudi and other GCC countries to rise oil production to take on 2 foes in one shot - USSR and revolutionary Iran. So, the oil price declined massively which further made repayment of Iraqi debt difficult. Then he went out of his mind and invaded Kuwait. USA got a golden excuse to attack Iraq.

USSR also was desperate when the oil price collapsed in 1985 and had to resort to overproducing oil to get forex to fund its client states. USSR did the mistake of "enjoying" high oil price of 1975-85 and felt that cutting short the enjoyment in 1985 when oil price fell might lead to mass protest. So, instead of cutting down on economy, USSR started to borrow and eventually could no longer sustain it

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/conoco-sees-u-s-shale-growth-at-25-in-2019-even-as-oil-slides

 

 

I see a lot of people putting down shale and the value of shale resources, yet the production keeps on going up month to month year over year. Yes there are debt issues, decline issues, pricing issues. I also take exception to statements made by CEO's and execs of shale companies such as " our breakeven is 2$/bbl". I think it was Pioneer exec who made that statement. I could be wrong but that was a couple of years ago. That was an "ENRON-esque" statement made by using "ENRON-esque" accounting playbook.

The fundamentals to a successful shale company operation lie in the facts that, using the best geotechnical suite of technologies to find the highest quality rocks, not paying "high prices" per acre (10,000$-100,000$/ acres) and not leasing land that doesnt provide high quality rocks under the surface, the key word is leasing STRATEGICALLY , keep costs down using every bit of technology and business procedure, management, operations controls; having a funding source and base that keeps debt down while having the freedom to operate and produce a sustainable long term production profile, keeping up with production declines (one of the best way to do is drill and complete in spots that have the highest and best accumulations of hydrocarbons and those spots keep "sourcing" "replacing" produced hydrocarbons, basically in excellent, best, better, good drainage spots). We will have boom and bust cycles , only the fittest survive.

We have seen hundreds of companies formed during the boom cycle of shale and hundreds go bust because they had the wrong business model and outlook and they thought they would hit a gusher or two and that will be their golden moment. I have heard a lot of people over the years and still keep on hearing from people, "oh my lease or my minerals" are x miles from  X company's well that came in @ 3000bpd .

Lot of things change under the surface in X miles in any direction. You can hit a gusher that is sustainable and produces 3,000bpd over a long time frame with low decline rates, you can hit a gusher that can have an IP of 8,000bpd for 120 days and declines after that down to 500bpd and keeps declining. You can hit a dry well. All these can be within 100ft of each other.

The technology to unlock the secrets of the quality of the rocks is key, right GEOLOGY and the right suite of technologies to where to drill and how to drill and complete!

 

 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

7 hours ago, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

USA always controls everything politically and only does gimmicks to appear "capitalist" so as to have excuses whenever it is not convenient. USA makes treaties like giving duty free imports to certain countries in return for providing permission to set up military base or other political favours, increases or decreases taxes to regulate goods, puts "environmental restrictions" to curb certain activities etc to enforce state control. For example, the permian shale had lot of area under "environmental restrictions" to conserve oil in 1980s - 90s but now these are free to be drilled!

USA can't sue OPEC as USA's petrodollar depends on political alliance, not on "free-market". So, any withdrawal from petrodollar alliance will doom USA. If USA wants dollars to be used for trade, they must keep their mouth shut. Suing OPEC is never an option.

Saddam's crime was going for Euro and also having bad fate. Demented Khomeini started a war with Iraq by calling for revolution against Saddam by Iraqis. For all practical purpose, Saddam hated USA and would have made good allies with Iran had Khomeini been more reasonable. But Khomeini was demented and despite Saddam being very welcoming to Iranian revolution, Khomeini declared war on Saddam. This ruined Iraq massively and put Iraq under debt. At the same time, USA persuaded Saudi and other GCC countries to rise oil production to take on 2 foes in one shot - USSR and revolutionary Iran. So, the oil price declined massively which further made repayment of Iraqi debt difficult. Then he went out of his mind and invaded Kuwait. USA got a golden excuse to attack Iraq.

USSR also was desperate when the oil price collapsed in 1985 and had to resort to overproducing oil to get forex to fund its client states. USSR did the mistake of "enjoying" high oil price of 1975-85 and felt that cutting short the enjoyment in 1985 when oil price fell might lead to mass protest. So, instead of cutting down on economy, USSR started to borrow and eventually could no longer sustain it

The US markets are the most "free" and "capitalistic" in the "free world"

You think the Indian Economy is an open and free market?

Is making treaties a bad thing? How many treaties does India have? to serve its own needs ?

Yes the US cant sue OPEC, it has been attempted, specially by the DEMS , who rant and rave OIL IS BAD, BIG OIL GREEDY CORPS each time they think they will lose votes because of energy costs go up.

Look @ so many attempts of getting a NO-OPEC bill.

Saddam's crimes were he killed and abused his own people and his neighbors. He thought he was a big fish in a big pond... The US led coalition that engaged  in the OPERATIONS DESERT STORM AND DESERT SHIELD in response to the Saddam directed Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, didnt need a "golden excuse" . It was the consensus of the majority of the world leaders to take that action. And by the way EURO wasnt a currency then. Saudi and other "GCC" or OPEC countries increased production to keep the oil prices in a fairly decent range to prevent the economies of the world to collapse from an energy shock affected the major energy source of the world.