Top 20 Oil-Producing Countries (PHOTOS)

A recent list from the AP reveals the top 20 oil-producing countries (in barrels per day), according to 2009 statistics by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

In light of recent oil spills, lawsuits, and environmental damage, it is debatable whether these statistics are something to be proud of, or if they merely further point at the urgency with which we need to pursue alternative forms of energy.

Check out the top 20 oil-producing countries below. Do any on the list surprise you?

1 of 20

#20. Azerbaijan

1 of 21

First Slide

Previous Slide

@

Azerbaijan produces 1.0 million barrels of oil per day. WikiLeaks cables suggest that there were resemblances between BP's recent Gulf Coast oil spill and a much lesser-known gas leak in Azerbaijan that occurred 18 months earlier.

Japan Tsunami Debris: Bones Expected To Wash Ashore, Oceanographer Says

gadgets/slideshows/223989/slide_223989_930216_small.jpg

Tornado In France: F1 Storm Touches Down South Of Toulouse (VIDEOS)

State Of The Air 2012: American Lung Association Reports Improvements, Challenges

Earth Week 2012 Challenges: Paperless Thursday

gadgets/slideshows/221797/slide_221797_891418_small.jpg

Earth Day 2012: Events Around The World

Earth Day 2012: Harder to See, Harder to Catch

Azerbaijan produces 1.0 million barrels of oil per day. WikiLeaks cables suggest that there were resemblances between BP's recent Gulf Coast oil spill and a much lesser-known gas leak in Azerbaijan that occurred 18 months earlier.

comments(875)

Total comments: 875 | Post a Comment

1 of 21

How Surprising This Producer Is

Rank #2  |  Average: 4

Unimpressed Shocked

• 
  1
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9
• 
  10

Top 5 Most Shocking Producers

loading...

Top 5 Most Shocking Producers

UserName

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Top User Slides

← Prev|Next →

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Users who voted on this slide

← Prev|Next →

loading...

Comments

[haskell]

03:01 PM on 04/11/2011

Energy Secretary Chu, 2008. “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” In Europe, gas is now more than $10 a gallon.

Here are the actions this administration has taken:
1 - moved to destroy offshore drilling in the Gulf
2 - continued ban of drilling offshore in FL, VA, NC, CA and AK
3 - continued ban of ANWAR in AK
4 - ban drilling in western states with Shale Oil
5 - encourage greater importation of oil, 2 billion dollars to Petrobras in Brazil (Soros stockholder)
6 - promoting green fantasies. No problem with research, but this technology is no mature.

And don't give me the speculator line. The leverage the speculators have is that we are not producing enough petroleum. Energy independence should be our goal, then a controlled rational switch to alternative fuels. But the administration's stated policy will cost jobs and impose an enormous hardship on working Americans.

[brenobacci]

01:24 AM on 04/14/2011

The hardship will be there either now or later. Enough of excuses, the time to switch to alternative fuels is now. That doesn't mean stop using oil now, but it seems there's more people engaged on drilling more and more than there are people working on this switch.

[jeanlucbastille]

12:09 AM on 04/15/2011

And yet now, in 2011 we are drilling
and producing more oil than anytime
after 2003.

We have restarted the deep water
drilling in the Gulf, even thou the oil co's have
not made any real improvements in safety.

ANWAR has very little usable reserves in an
environmentally sensitive area, besides the big oil
is currently drilling in only a fraction of their leases,
until they are utilizing all the area they already have
they really shouldn't go after a new land grab.

Drilling for shale oil is not so much drilling, but a mining
operation, think Canadian tarsands and then some. The problem
lies in the facts that you need a lot of energy, crushed ore and water
to separate the product.

Would you rather us paying more oil dollars to the despots
and unstable nations in Africa and MEast than to stable and
friendly Brazil?

And last, if we'd give the big oil, big coal and big nuke subsidies
to green tech, the problems would have been solved a long time ago.

The more we drill - the faster we will run out,
its time to look forward to new tech instead of
investing more into an old and inevitably dying
industry.

[Malcolm Hensley]

01:54 AM on 04/04/2011

I moved to a CNG Honda - it cost me less than a dollar a gallon to fill up at home!
I feel good not sending my money to #17 Libya, #11 Venezuela, #4 Iran, #2 Saudi Arabia!

OK, it feels good passing gasoline stations too!

[Nathan-Andrew-Hicks]

10:41 AM on 04/11/2011

I think that it is a step in the right direction but we shouldn't stop at natural gas. I envy you, that's for certain!

[KarlaElisa]

10:12 PM on 03/31/2011

please note, all the stats they give are for the year projected. so 'at present rate of consumption' really means 'if we only use what were using right now'. and that has not been the case in 2 successive years since we began.

so whatever amount of time they're telling you we have, it's less than that because global consumption is growing at a wicked little rate.

[KarlaElisa]

10:06 PM on 03/31/2011

look for the US to take their 'freedom package' into more nations in the years to come. violence is what they know best when it comes to procuring the resources they want.

[Kenz300]

09:52 PM on 03/26/2011

The worlds limited resources are coming head to head with the ever expanding
world population growth. Where will all the jobs, oil, water, food and other resources come
from to support all these people? The world added a billion people in the last 12 years.
It will add another billion people in the next 12 years. This is a recipe for disaster.

Musical chairs is fun if you get a chair. Not so much if not getting a chair means
no food, water or oil for you.

[HLL]

12:05 PM on 03/27/2011

I"d fan you again if I could, Kenz. Perfectly put. The population explosion is a problem NO ONE is addressing and it seems to me it should be the #1 topic ☮

[JWerner]

03:06 PM on 04/01/2011

It is not the population itself that is the problem, but rather the consumption of resources. Western nations consume far, far more in the way of resources, yet have less population than less-developed but more populous nations.

Add 100 million people living at the poverty line, and it strains water and basic infrastructure (which is somewhat easier to address, if the right people have the resources to do so). Add 100 million people living to American standards, and you've got a massive increase in oil, food, and resource usage in general. That's the problem. . .increasing population of the planet, ALONG WITH a gradually increasing usage of resources per capita.

[MikeyJaii]

08:45 PM on 03/23/2011

While I'm very shocked! I didn't know American even produced oil. Very shocking, I have always thought we imported.

[droog1]

12:51 PM on 04/18/2011

We do import, because we use more than we produce.

[Dale D]

10:49 PM on 03/22/2011

This should get the greenshirts to try and shut down oil production in America again. They don't like to be at the top of any list having to do with that dirty oil stuff.

[Lee Wells]

08:26 AM on 03/12/2011

it's the end of the world as we know it........
I didn't read all the comments and the article seems to also have 'misplaced' the information however....
- only *5* of the listed 'top 20' HAVE NOT REACHED PEAK OIL...
- 5 are in 'I don't know' territory [I can't tell from the production graphs whether they are in permanent decline yet or not]
- 10 are in permanent decline
But please don't take my word for it look at the graphs for yourself... heres one to get you started...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hubbert_world_2004.png

[KarlaElisa]

10:08 PM on 03/31/2011

which is exactly why you can fully expect the united states to find reason after reason to tangle with countries on that list to ensure domination of this resource.

[rpr]

06:47 PM on 03/03/2011

Here's some pretty lucid insight on where things are going:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175362/tomgram%3A_michael_klare%2C_oilquake_in_the_middle_east/

[burgerandfries]

09:43 PM on 02/26/2011

Well, well, well...what I think we have here is a clear case of "conditioning"...a method by which the corporate interests, whom we all know [really] controls everything...scheme and devise a plan to brainwash the American public into thinking something, that's horribly BAD, has redeeming qualities that are "GOOD" for us! (examples?...fluoride in tap-water, vaccines and immunizations that are loaded with mercury, squalene, and thimerosal, [read the incert] TSA pat-downs vs. naked-body-scanners equipped with lethal radiation-just to name a few!). But...if the US government says it's OK...It MUST BE OK! Right? It's high-time sheeple WAKE UP and smell the corruption! Stop going along with it!

BTW...How much do you think this new NASA "Sputnik research" is costing the US taxpayer? It's deplorable! Simply deplorable!

[DanSc]

12:22 AM on 02/26/2011

Please build the new pipleine between the USA and Canada. If we're going to send billions overseas, I'd just as soon send it to Canada. Canadians will send much of that money back by purchasing American products.

[droog1]

12:53 PM on 04/18/2011

Ummm...pretty sure there already are several pipelines between the US and Canada. No country exports more oil to the US than Canada.

[scottyknows]

04:45 PM on 02/24/2011

Since oil is abiogenic in origin, there will never be a shortage.

Under picture #3 it says the US is currently cleaning up its BP oil spill. Though the spill certainly affected the US more than any other country, BP is a United Kingdom company.

[AJW1976]

09:21 PM on 02/24/2011

"Since oil is abiogenic in origin, there will never be a shortage."

The abiogenic theory, which dates to the 16th century, has long been discarded as the origin of oil.

I am very curious: where did you learn that oil is abiogenic in origin? I certainly hope it was not in a science class.

[ILoveFiction]

10:54 PM on 02/24/2011

Science fiction?