“More action,” you say? As if Oil & Gas companies are sitting around twiddling their thumbs, ignoring a fortune buried under their feet. Here’s the unvarnished reality: companies develop gas resources when there’s profit—real, substantial, reliable profit—on the table. Not because activists demand it, not because ministers pose for cameras, and certainly not because some think-tank intern produces a glossy PDF.
Associated gas, the by-product you get when developing an oil well, is a nuisance. It’s unstable, unpredictable, and forever at odds with the actual priority: oil. Oil flow gets stabilized, measured, optimized. Gas? It sputters, coughs, and behaves like an unruly child in a room full of machinery that doesn’t tolerate surprises. Add to this a landscape of scattered wells—many of them barely dripping production—and suddenly collecting that gas is not just technically possible; it’s financially idiotic. Why spend money and time to chase pennies in gas when the real money sits in oil?
That’s why so much associated gas gets flared, even in regions where the terrain and geology should make capture easier. Not because engineers are incompetent, but because the economics are unforgiving. The opportunity cost matters. If you’re already making a dollar with oil, no boardroom applauds you for crawling after a nickel’s worth of gas.
Now, genuine gas development is another story—and yes, it absolutely makes sense, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean, a region that imports oil and bleeds cash for it. Replacing oil with gas isn’t just “environmentally sound”; it’s fiscally intelligent. But getting there requires decisions far above the level of the field engineers. It demands political will, multi-billion-dollar commitments, and the kind of strategic clarity governments rarely muster until their backs are against the wall.Until then, the flames will keep licking the night sky. Not out of negligence, but out of cold, straightforward arithmetic.