10 hours ago, steven100 said:

sorry, Thailand was one country that didn't support UNHCR's boycott and sanctions and arms embargo against Myanmar.    Thailand doesn't give a rats ....   imo

Exactly, Juntas stick together like flypaper.

So in history Burma came into Thailand. Now Thailand PTT is going into Burma to get some oil.

  Kind of ironic if you look at some aspects of this story.

11 hours ago, BKKBike09 said:

It's been nearly a year since the coup and several years since the Rohingya persecution got really bad so, given how long both Total and Chevron have been operating in Yadana, it's taken them a while to develop a conscience.  Chevron and many other oil majors are pulling out of many SE Asian production fields largely because a) many of the fields are heavily depleted and nearing end of life and b) fossil fuels are becoming a liability. I don't think "ethics" has much to do with it. Just bottom line.

agree, this has nothing to do with ethics but more like "money" talks louder, they don't give a damn about ethics as they have none

11 hours ago, BKKBike09 said:

It's been nearly a year since the coup and several years since the Rohingya persecution got really bad so, given how long both Total and Chevron have been operating in Yadana, it's taken them a while to develop a conscience.  Chevron and many other oil majors are pulling out of many SE Asian production fields largely because a) many of the fields are heavily depleted and nearing end of life and b) fossil fuels are becoming a liability. I don't think "ethics" has much to do with it. Just bottom line.

There's another side point; most of the major oil/gas giants worlwide are starting to/have already mad serious changes to their business models/product areas because they realize the world is less and less accepting of fossil fuels.

 

One oil/gas giant has already moved towards massive/innovative quality food production but with stated policy to not harm small farmers. (Wait and see on the last point.) 

My country is different ????

Incorrect, PTTEP has had a partnership in this field for many years and are not walking in!

4 minutes ago, Darkside Gray said:

Incorrect, PTTEP has had a partnership in this field for many years and are not walking in!

PTTEP has been working in Myanmar for more than 30 years. Original post is much ado about nothing.

Neither of the companys' pulling out has anything to do with human rights - though of course they will both play it up for the publicity. Chevron's decision was reached following the loss of its concessions in the Gulf of Thailand, making a strategic decision to sell its share in the Yadana Gas Field, which was operated by Total.  Other share holders are PTTEP and MOGE (Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise - the combined national oil company and oil ministry).  Total has been winding down operations in Yadana for several years as part of its plans to divest itself from most of its Southeast Asian concessions - it closed up many of its offices in a number of countries and moved to a central Singapore location a few years ago.  It's laughable that a company that works so closely with the Iranian regime should suddenly start quoting human rights, and rather telling that both companies began their investments in Burma under the original junta, while Aung San Suu Kyi was still under house arrest.

 

Thailand is the major buyer of gas from Myanmar, and relies heavily on it for electricity generation, so it's strategically important to ensure its continued supply. PTTEP currently operates the Zawitika Field, has an interest in the Yetagun Field - operated by Malaysia's Petronas Carigali, and was already a share holder in Yadana, so is the logical company to take over Yadana Operations.  But let's not let the facts get in the way of another good Thai bashing.

 

 

18 hours ago, BKKBike09 said:

It's been nearly a year since the coup and several years since the Rohingya persecution got really bad so, given how long both Total and Chevron have been operating in Yadana, it's taken them a while to develop a conscience.  

Anyone who believes that corporations have a conscience that supersedes their bottom line and shareholder dividends are kidding themselves.  Now they may leave due to political, geo-political, and social instability if they perceive there is a chance that their operations will be impacted in the long-term or if they fear the government nationalizing their regional interests.  But as long as the money is flowing corporations don't care who is genociding whom.
But it is something to watch, say, if Western interests decide to turn Myanmar into an Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yeman, Cambodia, Laos, or Vietnam. In an of itself it not much of a resource rich country unless the deep-state types want another heroin hub now that Afghanistan is down the tubes. But it is a strategic chess piece in the terms of A2/AD (anti-access/areas-denial) in order to eye-gouge China.  So from a Geo-political standpoint, perhaps France's Total is foreshadowing something that is about to come?  It wouldn't be the first time the West used R2P in order to devastate a "crappy little country that the US throws up against the wall every few years to show that they still mean business" to paraphrase Michael Ledeen. 
This move on the part of France's Total and Chevron probably has a lot more to do with China's influence on Myanmar as well as China's pipelines and BRI trade routes though Myanmar to bypass the Straights of Malacca.  Yeah, they are leaving for a reason - a conscience has nothing to do with it.
Personally I wouldn't be surprised if a "Western Coalition of the Willing" doesn't bomb Myanmar back into the stone age while spewing their Responsibility To Protect doctrine and claiming that destroying the country's infrastructure is to save the Myanmar people from the terrible Myanmar dictatorial regime - even though every time the West does that they end up genociding a few hundred thousand civilians in the process.

Trust me though - If Myanmar blow up one way or another?  The Blow-Back will hit Thailand for sure.  Which by the way make me wonder way Thailand is sucking up to Saudi Arabia?  ????

PTTEP will simply work with China in a win-win scenario. 
Really - I don't buy the "Humanitarian" angle cited by Chevron and Total.  They're leaving for economic reasons.  The interesting part will be when it becomes clear exactly what economic reasons are. 
 

Its so reassuring to know that global oil mega-giants like Total and Chevron are such bastions of morality .... NOT!

10 hours ago, scorecard said:

One oil/gas giant has already moved towards massive/innovative quality food production but with stated policy to not harm small farmers. (Wait and see on the last point.) 

Of course not.  You'll own nothing and you'll be happy.
Yeah, master will let you have a vegetable garden to tend after working 16 hours a day on his Corporate Farm.

9 hours ago, ballpoint said:

Neither of the companys' pulling out has anything to do with human rights - though of course they will both play it up for the publicity. Chevron's decision was reached following the loss of its concessions in the Gulf of Thailand, making a strategic decision to sell its share in the Yadana Gas Field, which was operated by Total.  Other share holders are PTTEP and MOGE (Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise - the combined national oil company and oil ministry).  Total has been winding down operations in Yadana for several years as part of its plans to divest itself from most of its Southeast Asian concessions - it closed up many of its offices in a number of countries and moved to a central Singapore location a few years ago.  It's laughable that a company that works so closely with the Iranian regime should suddenly start quoting human rights, and rather telling that both companies began their investments in Burma under the original junta, while Aung San Suu Kyi was still under house arrest.

 

Thailand is the major buyer of gas from Myanmar, and relies heavily on it for electricity generation, so it's strategically important to ensure its continued supply. PTTEP currently operates the Zawitika Field, has an interest in the Yetagun Field - operated by Malaysia's Petronas Carigali, and was already a share holder in Yadana, so is the logical company to take over Yadana Operations.  But let's not let the facts get in the way of another good Thai bashing.

 

 

Thanks for putting this straight. I've worked in IOC management and tactical withdrawals take years, otherwise very bad things happen and you can take Venezuela as an example.

 

As Ballpoint mentions; the strategic withdrawal from Myanmar began long before the coup. Not only does an IOC need to negotiate the sale of its assets, it needs to ensure that there is a viable plan for decommissioning the infrastructure once the fields are depleted. Not to mention a million other considerations.

 

But let's look at another aspect of this situation. After the oil crash of 2014, a very large proportion of the investment community were led to believe that the "oil age" was over and we were entering an entirely new age of energy production. Oil & gas investing became toxic and COVID drove energy prices down even further. New energy generation from wind and solar was trumpeted as the way forward and all the "smart money" went into these projects - with a hefty dollop of taxpayers' and billpayers' money included.

 

In the early 1980's, global energy production relied on fossil fuels to the tune of about 80%. After massive global investment in renewables over recent decades, our reliance on fossil fuels is approximately...   80%. At the same time, the lack of investment in oil means that the IOC's are struggling to meet the ongoing demand, OPEC+ can barely keep up and non-OPEC supply chains are disintegrating.

 

Every country needs to look after its energy security. Some, including Germany and the UK, have decided to ignore common sense and get off the bus while it's still moving. Now we have the situation in Ukraine which was entirely predictable to anyone who understood demand and supply economics.

 

Back to the original post, Thailand's production activities make a lot more sense, not only are they securing their energy policy, they are acquiring oil products for non-energy use - refined products which are the basis for millions of products that we take for granted.

 

However, all this may change when we can make TV's, paint and MRI machines out of reconstituted bamboo. I'm not holding my breath.

21 hours ago, stubuzz said:

Things have changed here in Saudi. Workers now need to be qualified/certified in the field they work in. Tests are also given before work permits can be renewed.

Does Saudi use North Koreans for construction like some other countries? I assumed Saudi wanted to phase out the NK's and needed another source to turn to, but it's just a guess

On 1/27/2022 at 10:01 PM, alextrat1966 said:

I would have done the same. 

Yep, Thailand needs the gas from Myanmar and restoring ties with Saudi Arabia is long overdue. It takes a lot of time to even attempt to build the (in name only) renewable energy sources, like solar and wind turbines or dams. I don't see them cutting off the power while they do that.

15 hours ago, 3STTW said:

In the early 1980's, global energy production relied on fossil fuels to the tune of about 80%. After massive global investment in renewables over recent decades, our reliance on fossil fuels is approximately...   80%. At the same time, the lack of investment in oil means that the IOC's are struggling to meet the ongoing demand, OPEC+ can barely keep up and non-OPEC supply chains are disintegrating.

 

Every country needs to look after its energy security. Some, including Germany and the UK, have decided to ignore common sense and get off the bus while it's still moving. Now we have the situation in Ukraine which was entirely predictable to anyone who understood demand and supply economics.

 

Back to the original post, Thailand's production activities make a lot more sense, not only are they securing their energy policy, they are acquiring oil products for non-energy use - refined products which are the basis for millions of products that we take for granted.

 

However, all this may change when we can make TV's, paint and MRI machines out of reconstituted bamboo. I'm not holding my breath.

Well stated. I'm sure many will think you mistype the 80%.  Your "Every country needs to look after its energy security." is spot on. Thank you!

So sad how one Buddhist nation can do that to another Buddhist nation. GREED. Shame on the human race.

On 1/27/2022 at 11:00 PM, The Hammer2021 said:

How does the OP behave and how does his country  behave that gives him the right to criticize Thailand?..

Why should he NOT have the right to criticise Thailand? Many other people do.

37 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Why should he NOT have the right to criticise Thailand? Many other people do.

The proposition is fallacious. If you replace the people Thais and replace  nation Thai WITH ANY OTHER PEOPLE OR NATION Australians/Australia- England/English- American/America- French/France etc etc It would still be equally true. And because it is equally  true of any other country it means Thais and Thailand  is no different.  Is not special.  It is just a generalisation common  to other nations and their peoples'. Therefore  not worthy of comment to any rational person. To make meaningful contributions to forums and debates one needs critical  thinking  skills not just opinions. And if you are going to propose an idea  basic literacy  is helpful.  There is no apostrophe required in Thais. It's a simple plural not a possessive.

32 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

The proposition is fallacious. If you replace the people Thais and replace  nation Thai WITH ANY OTHER PEOPLE OR NATION Australians/Australia- England/English- American/America- French/France etc etc It would still be equally true. And because it is equally  true of any other country it means Thais and Thailand  is no different.  Is not special.  It is just a generalisation common  to other nations and their peoples'. Therefore  not worthy of comment to any rational person. To make meaningful contributions to forums and debates one needs critical  thinking  skills not just opinions. And if you are going to propose an idea  basic literacy  is helpful.  There is no apostrophe required in Thais. It's a simple plural not a possessive.

can you translate that to english ....     thanks

30 minutes ago, steven100 said:

can you translate that to english ....     thanks

It is English!. Fallacy: a lie or untruth..you'll have to work out the rest yourself or move to a child's  forum where the language  may be easier for you..lol

1 hour ago, The Hammer2021 said:

It is English!. Fallacy: a lie or untruth..you'll have to work out the rest yourself or move to a child's  forum where the language  may be easier for you..lol

billd766. Can you read English? What do you find confusing?

No successful public company whatsoever in the world ever cared about anything else then money . Any company claiming they do since they didn't do such thing is because they could afford to do so and for public view on the company name .

If people die in a company and the name is in the news , its bad publicity . If they go inside a country with "less human rights" they claim others do it also , and we are talking with the government to make changes , or else , we didn't know , it's not our company it is 1 of our subdivisions ...

Companies care for the money , they are not social welfare houses .

On 1/27/2022 at 6:04 PM, cncltd1973 said:

I think the Saudi meeting is a great benefit for Thailand. It's more than likely a way to supply Saudi with a cheap construction force, but that will be money coming back to Thailand. A lot of desperate, unemployed construction workers will get shipped over and their salaries will feed their starving families. I'm sure Saudi will dock a percentage to recoup the loss of jewels, and some will go into the pockets of the generals, but that's a small price to pay. Without tourism, Thailand needs a source of incoming funds and there aren't many options.

Are those desperate unemployed construction workers unemployed because of the huge army of Burmese, Lao and Cambodian workers in Thailand or are the Thai just not prepared to do this kind of work ?

3 hours ago, Albert Zweistein said:

Are those desperate unemployed construction workers unemployed because of the huge army of Burmese, Lao and Cambodian workers in Thailand or are the Thai just not prepared to do this kind of work ?

Skilled Thai construction workers especially have been working overseas for years and are well respected in their industry. In Thailand use of Thai construction workers depends upon the Contractor, type off work, etc.

59 minutes ago, rimmae2 said:

Skilled Thai construction workers especially have been working overseas for years and are well respected in their industry. In Thailand use of Thai construction workers depends upon the Contractor, type off work, etc.

I've seen "skilled" Thai working in Singapore, they were shoveling sand. I also remember the "skilled" berry pickers in Scandinavia. If they are so well respected why ain't they working in their own country ? Type of work /contractor is BS, it's the salary that matters,in other words the workers from the surrounding countries are used as slaves. Just remember the way they were treated/locked up in their camps at the beginning of the Covid pandemia. Ever seen how they are being transported jam packed in an open lorry ? Not human and absolutely IMPOSSIBLE in the western world.

2 hours ago, rimmae2 said:

Skilled Thai construction workers especially have been working overseas for years and are well respected in their industry. In Thailand use of Thai construction workers depends upon the Contractor, type off work, etc.

nothing to do with the contractor / type of work.   It's the cheap wages ..... Why do you think Saudi gets Banglas to sweep the roads. 

13 minutes ago, steven100 said:

nothing to do with the contractor / type of work.   It's the cheap wages ..... Why do you think Saudi gets Banglas to sweep the roads. 

I don't need to think. I know from experience of working in the construction industry in many countries including Thailand for all my career. If you knew you would know that certain Thai Contractors use a higher percentage of Thais than labour from neighbouring countries on projects in Thailand especially on prestigious projects such as Queen Sirikit Convention Centre.

14 hours ago, The Hammer2021 said:

billd766. Can you read English? What do you find confusing?

@billd766   is too busy to answer so I will do.... I find all off it (very) confusing 555

Sorry bud, but one look at your profile pic and I find it very difficult to take anything you say seriously.