The one in Saudi Arabia came on line shortly after the start of things. I told my wife that this whole thing appears to be an operation to increase oil prices so oil producing countries can extract money from non-producing countries.
The Strait of Hormuz was 50/50 controlled and shared between Iran and Oman. Neither owned exclusive rights to control the strait, but Iran controlled the Eastern 1/2 and Oman the Western 1/2, both being navigable by shipping.
As soon as Iran started their crud... they claimed ownership over BOTH halves of the strait and that they controlled all shipping. Then they started claiming parts of Oman's territory as well.
A week ago, Iran claimed that they have exclusive rights to control shipping access, and that if a new bypass canal was built, they would own that too.
This is NOT a shipping or access problem. It's an IRAN problem. If you don't deal with the menace, then no matter what solution... Iran will try to control it or destroy it. You can't ignore the regional bully.
And where does one propose to dig this canal (in the desert, where there is no water). And why not rely on a pipeline instead? Could be a lot cheaper. Oh wait, it's already there - sure terrorisms could break the pipeline, but there is such a thing as peace, even if you don't believe in it.
Would take big pipeline, and many of them I think.
It would take around 10–15 days for a single very large crude oil pipeline to handle the daily oil volume (roughly 21 million barrels), plus additional time or separate infrastructure for the LNG/gas volume.
Look at the elevation from the gulf of california north to the salton sea. Most of that is below or just above sea level. Be relatively easy to build a canal inland.
Are you saying that a LOCK system would require less dramatic raising/lowering of ships? Cause one thing I was wondering is where would the large fresh water source be, like Lake Gatun for Panama that uses Gravity to fill locks.
If Saltwater was used for locks, it would require large pumps. Each ship transit of Panama canal uses roughly 50 million gallons of fresh water, which ultimately flows out to the sea. That is one hell of a lot of water to pump in.
The canal is a great workaround for geographic problems, but not as good for political ones.
Think about it with the Panama Canal: if we can't kick the Chinese out of it, they'll softly take over; and if we build another, it only means the Chinese will eventually edge us out in the new canal too. The build would buy a few years at disproportionate expense. Same thing goes for Hormuz: if we can't make the terrorists capitulate, it just means they'll go to wherever we build the workaround.
Iran was already working to shut down the Strait of Bab Al-Mandab (entrance to the Red Sea at the southern tip of Yemen) and has tried to bomb the pipelines and production capacity of its neighbors. To win at whack-a-mole, building more holes won't help. You gotta close 'em all down and smoke 'em out.
There are plans .... but ..... there is quite some issues with it. Simply take a look at the geography ....
Panama:
Locks at each end lift ships up to Gatun Lake, an artificial fresh water lake 26 meters above sea level, created by damming the Chagres River and Lake Alajuela to reduce the amount of excavation work required for the canal. Locks then lower the ships at the other end. The original locks are 33.5 meters wide and allow the passage of Panamax ships. A third, wider lane of locks was constructed between September 2007 and May 2016. The expanded waterway began commercial operation on 26 June 2016. The new locks allow for the transit of larger, Neopanamax ships. An average of 200,000,000 litres of fresh water is used in a single passing of a ship
And, although 82 kilometers long, its elevation is only 26 meters.
Where would you go? East, west, North South? None of it is outside of IRGC reach. Then measure the distance. ....
Now,. it may be a good idea to hook up with a prospected new canal across the Gulf of Akkaba and into Gaza. It would be logical from the point where IMEC goes into Europe ...
Where does the water for the locks come from? Salt or fresh water?
If the first, where would that have to come from. This is not just a natural spring hooking up with a river, like in Lybia.
There are already a number of projects in that region using pipelines to bypass the Strait.
Dig a little - You'll turn up all sorts of projects & none of them are "USA" projects.
The one in Saudi Arabia came on line shortly after the start of things. I told my wife that this whole thing appears to be an operation to increase oil prices so oil producing countries can extract money from non-producing countries.
The Strait of Hormuz was 50/50 controlled and shared between Iran and Oman. Neither owned exclusive rights to control the strait, but Iran controlled the Eastern 1/2 and Oman the Western 1/2, both being navigable by shipping.
As soon as Iran started their crud... they claimed ownership over BOTH halves of the strait and that they controlled all shipping. Then they started claiming parts of Oman's territory as well.
A week ago, Iran claimed that they have exclusive rights to control shipping access, and that if a new bypass canal was built, they would own that too.
This is NOT a shipping or access problem. It's an IRAN problem. If you don't deal with the menace, then no matter what solution... Iran will try to control it or destroy it. You can't ignore the regional bully.
And where does one propose to dig this canal (in the desert, where there is no water). And why not rely on a pipeline instead? Could be a lot cheaper. Oh wait, it's already there - sure terrorisms could break the pipeline, but there is such a thing as peace, even if you don't believe in it.
Would take big pipeline, and many of them I think.
It would take around 10–15 days for a single very large crude oil pipeline to handle the daily oil volume (roughly 21 million barrels), plus additional time or separate infrastructure for the LNG/gas volume.
Do a map search for "two seas view, Oman" be pretty fast and easy to build a passage through there.
Why can't U.S. just build canal along southern border and eliminate Panama? Think of the revenue a U.S. canal would generate.
Look at the elevation from the gulf of california north to the salton sea. Most of that is below or just above sea level. Be relatively easy to build a canal inland.
Most of that is below or just above sea level.
Are you saying that a LOCK system would require less dramatic raising/lowering of ships? Cause one thing I was wondering is where would the large fresh water source be, like Lake Gatun for Panama that uses Gravity to fill locks.
If Saltwater was used for locks, it would require large pumps. Each ship transit of Panama canal uses roughly 50 million gallons of fresh water, which ultimately flows out to the sea. That is one hell of a lot of water to pump in.
Oh, aside from being thousands of miles long and running uphill over the Rocky Mountains.... But wait! Don't we have this thing called a railroad?
Thank you all for your comments and insight. Again, Middle Eastern geography has never been high in my studies list.
Maybe not the exact canal you imagined :
https://www.newarab.com/news/what-israels-ben-gurion-canal-plan-and-why-gaza-matters
The canal is a great workaround for geographic problems, but not as good for political ones.
Think about it with the Panama Canal: if we can't kick the Chinese out of it, they'll softly take over; and if we build another, it only means the Chinese will eventually edge us out in the new canal too. The build would buy a few years at disproportionate expense. Same thing goes for Hormuz: if we can't make the terrorists capitulate, it just means they'll go to wherever we build the workaround.
Iran was already working to shut down the Strait of Bab Al-Mandab (entrance to the Red Sea at the southern tip of Yemen) and has tried to bomb the pipelines and production capacity of its neighbors. To win at whack-a-mole, building more holes won't help. You gotta close 'em all down and smoke 'em out.
There are plans .... but ..... there is quite some issues with it. Simply take a look at the geography ....
Panama: Locks at each end lift ships up to Gatun Lake, an artificial fresh water lake 26 meters above sea level, created by damming the Chagres River and Lake Alajuela to reduce the amount of excavation work required for the canal. Locks then lower the ships at the other end. The original locks are 33.5 meters wide and allow the passage of Panamax ships. A third, wider lane of locks was constructed between September 2007 and May 2016. The expanded waterway began commercial operation on 26 June 2016. The new locks allow for the transit of larger, Neopanamax ships. An average of 200,000,000 litres of fresh water is used in a single passing of a ship
And, although 82 kilometers long, its elevation is
only26 meters.In comparison: use this map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/23.6285/51.2945&layers=Y
Where would you go? East, west, North South? None of it is outside of IRGC reach. Then measure the distance. ....
Now,. it may be a good idea to hook up with a prospected new canal across the Gulf of Akkaba and into Gaza. It would be logical from the point where IMEC goes into Europe ...
Where does the water for the locks come from? Salt or fresh water? If the first, where would that have to come from. This is not just a natural spring hooking up with a river, like in Lybia.
take a look here: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marwan-Jaju/publication/306382555/figure/fig2/AS:398225812017159@1471955841021/Simplified-geological-map-of-the-Arabian-Peninsula-showing-the-studied-hydrocarbon_Q640.jpg
and here:
https://www.arabnews.com/sites/default/files/pictures/March/694711/2024/4286641-1448042926.jpg
A canal with Salt water would totally ruin it. And a canal sourced with Fresh water would totally deplete it
With this background .... Pricing comes into view. Then stabilizing the Gulf region is of the highest priority.
SO, your argument makes sense, it is indeed cheaper to Bomb Iran. But not for the reasons you are espousing.