Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Officials: Oil prices due to fundamentals. Energy tsunami coming...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:20 AM
Original message
Officials: Oil prices due to fundamentals. Energy tsunami coming...
Some people just won't get it. I posted this to another thread but so far no response so I'm posting it to the main board.

The reason oil prices went down yesterday is because financial sector holdings were liquidated to raise cash for bank runs and margin calls. It was NOT because speculations fell apart. The reason they're down today is that imports increased the previous week. Funny thing, though. So far this morning the oil analysts have no idea where the extra imports came from. But there is no penalty for turning in false numbers to the EIA nor is there a way to know (at least not yet) whether or not the high price of oil has caused the diversion of oil that would have gone somewhere else that can now no longer afford it. Also, theories that speculators are running up the price of oil are only partially correct. After all, we're in the midst of a correction and yet the price of oil IS STILL ABOVE $130 PER BARREL!

However, what we did get yesterday is an indication of the energy situation:

From the http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/business/16fed.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin">New York Times:


-snip-

Mr. Bernanke was especially pessimistic about any easing of energy prices, dismissing suggestions that they were being driven by speculation in futures markets. Instead, he said high energy costs reflected the markets’ recognition that demand was outstripping supplies.

“Over the past several years, the world economy has expanded at its fastest pace in decades, leading to substantial increases in the demand for oil,” Mr. Bernanke said. “On the supply side, despite sharp increases in prices, the production of oil has risen only slightly in the past few years.”

-snip-


And from the http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080715-1.html">chimp:


-snip-

Q Gas prices are now approaching $5 a gallon in some parts of the country. Offshore oil exploration is obviously a long-term approach. What is the short-term advice for Americans? What can you do now to help them?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, there is a psychology in the oil market that basically says, supplies are going to stay stagnant while demand rises. And that's reflected somewhat in the price of crude oil. Gasoline prices are reflected -- the amount of a gasoline price at the pump is reflected in the price of crude oil. And therefore, it seems like it makes sense to me to say to the world that we're going to use new technologies to explore for oil and gas in the United States -- offshore oil, ANWR, oil shale projects -- to help change the psychology, to send a clear message that the supplies of oil will increase.

Secondly, obviously good conservation measures matter. I've been reading a lot about how the automobile companies are beginning to adjust -- people -- consumers are beginning to say, wait a minute, I don't want a gas guzzler anymore, I want a smaller car. So the two need to go hand in hand. There is no immediate fix. This took us a while to get in this problem; there is no short-term solution. I think it was in the Rose Garden where I issued this brilliant statement: If I had a magic wand -- but the President doesn't have a magic wand. You just can't say, low gas. It took us a while to get here and we need to have a good strategy to get out of it.

Q But you do have the Strategic Oil Petroleum Reserve. What about opening that?

THE PRESIDENT: The Strategic Oil Petroleum Reserve is for, you know, emergencies. But that doesn't address the fundamental issue. And we need to address the fundamental issue, which I, frankly, have been talking about since I first became President -- which is a combination of using technology to have alternative sources of energy, but at the same time finding oil and gas here at home. And now is the time to get it done. I heard somebody say, well, it's going to take seven years. Well, if we'd have done it seven years ago we'd be having a different conversation today. I'm not suggesting it would have completely created -- you know, changed the dynamics in the world, but it certainly would have been -- we'd have been using more of our own oil and sending less money overseas.

-snip-


and...


-snip-

Q Following up on the question about oil, in the past, when oil prices have gone up a lot, they've wound up going down a lot afterward. But I wonder if you're able to say that oil prices in the future are going to come down a lot.

THE PRESIDENT: I can't predict, John. I mean, look, my attitude is, is that unless there is a focused effort -- in the short term -- unless there's a focused effort to bring more supplies to market, there's going to be a lot of upward pressure on price. We got 85 million barrels a day and -- of demand and 86 million barrels of production. And it's just -- it's too narrow a spread, it seems like to me.

Now, I'm encouraged by, you know, the Caspian Basin exploration. I'm encouraged that the Saudis are reinvesting a lot into their older fields. And remember, some of these oil fields get on the decline rate, which requires a lot of investment to keep their production up to previous levels. So one thing we look at is how much money is being reinvested in some of those fields. I'm encouraged by that.

I am discouraged by the fact that some nations subsidize the purchases of product, like gasoline, which, therefore, means that demand may not be causing the market to adjust as rapidly as we'd like. I was heartened by the fact that the Chinese the other day announced that they're going to start reducing some of their subsidies, which all of a sudden you may have some, you know, demand-driven changes in the overall balance.

But, look, if we conserve and find more energy, we will done -- have done our part to address, you know, the global market right now. And the other thing is that this is just a transition period. I mean, all of us want to get away from reliance upon hydrocarbons, but it's not going to happen overnight. One of these days people are going to be using battery technologies in their cars. You've heard me say this a lot. I'm confident it's going to happen. And the throw-away line, of course, is that your car won't have to look like a golf cart.

But the question then becomes, where are we going to get electricity? And that's why I'm a big believer in nuclear power, to be able to make us less dependent on oil and better stewards of the environment. But there is a transition period during the hydrocarbon era, and it hasn't ended yet, as our people now know. Gasoline prices are high.

Again, I don't want to be a "I told you so," but if you go back and look at the strategy we put out early on in this administration, we understood what was coming. We knew the markets were going to be tight. And therefore, we called for additional exploration at home, plus what has been happening, which is an acceleration of new technologies -- including ethanol technologies -- to get us less dependent on crude oil from overseas.

-snip-


and...


-snip-

Q `You never mention oil companies. Are you confident that American oil producers are tapping all of the sources they have out there, including offshore? And on Iraq, will you sign an interim agreement with Prime Minister Maliki on American operations in Iraq, leaving it to your successor to do a more permanent agreement?

THE PRESIDENT: There are -- let me start with Iraq. We're in the process of working on a strategic framework agreement with the Iraqi government that will talk about cooperation on a variety of fronts -- diplomacy, economics, justice. Part of that agreement is a security agreement, and I believe that -- you know, they want to have an aspirational goal as to how quickly the transition to what we have called overwatch takes place. Overwatch will mean that the U.S. will be in a training mission, logistical support as well as special ops.

In order for our troops to be in a foreign country, there must be an understanding with the government. There must be authorities to operate, as well as protections for our troops. We're in the process of negotiating that, as well. And it needs to be done prior to the year because -- unless, of course, the U.N. mandate is extended. And so there are two aspects to the agreement -- people seem to conflate the two -- and we're working both of them simultaneously.

Let's see here.

Q American oil producers?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, what was the question again on that?

Q You talked about offshore --

THE PRESIDENT: What about them -- do I think they're investing capital to find more reserves with the price at $140 a barrel? Absolutely. Take an offshore exploration company. First of all, it costs a lot of money to buy the lease, so they tie up capital. Secondly, it takes a lot of money to do the geophysics, to determine what the structure may or may not look like. That ties up capital. Then they put the rig out there. Now, first of all, in a federal offshore lease, if you're not exploring within a set period of time, you lose your bonus; you lose the amount of money that you paid to get the lease in the first place.

And once you explore, your first exploratory, if you happen to find oil or gas, it is -- you'll find yourself in a position where a lot of capital is tied up. And it becomes in your interest, your economic interest, to continue to explore so as to reduce the capital costs of the project on a per-barrel basis. And so I -- I think -- I think they're exploring. And hopefully a lot of people continue to explore so that the supply of oil worldwide increases relative to demand.

Now, people say, what about the speculators? I think you can't help but notice there is some volatility in price in the marketplace, which obviously there are some people in the -- buying and selling on a daily basis. On the other hand, the fundamentals are what's really driving the long-term price of oil, and that is, demand for oil has increased, and supply has not kept up with it. And so part of our strategy in our country has got to be to say, okay, here are some suspected reserves and that we ought to go after them in an environmentally friendly way.

A buddy of mine said, well, what about the reefs? So I'm concerned about the reefs. I'm a fisherman, I like to fish, reefs are important for fisheries. But the technology is such that you can protect the reefs. You don't have to drill on top of a reef. You can drill away from a reef and then have a horizontal hole to help you explore a reservoir.

It's like in Alaska. You know, in the old days, you would have had to have -- if you ever go out to West Texas, you'll see, there's like a rig every 20 acres, depending upon the formation. In Alaska you can have one pad with a lot of horizontal drilling, which enables you to exploit the resources in a way that doesn't damage the environment. These are new technologies that have come to be, and yet we've got an old energy policy that hasn't recognized how the industry has changed. And now is the time to get people to recognize how the industry has changed.

-snip-


and...


-snip-

I fully understand that this is a transition period away from hydrocarbon, but we ought to be wise about how we use our own resources.

-snip-


And this from the Associated Press about the 21st Century Energy Group which includes Henry Kissinger, Colin Powell and six other former secretaries of state or defense, former senators of both parties and a half dozen former senior White House advisers and other Cabinet officers for both Republican and Democratic presidents:


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hiir4RiaOoe6dOg9zReYKuQa4G2gD91UI8JG0">Energy tsunami coming, ex-policymakers warn

A bipartisan group of 27 elder statesmen is sending an open letter to both presidential candidates and every member of Congress saying the country faces "a long-term energy crisis" that threatens the security and prosperity of future generations if swift action isn't taken.

-snip-

"We must re-examine outdated and entrenched positions," the group says in the letter to be sent Wednesday to the campaigns of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and to his GOP rival John McCain, as well as members of Congress and all 50 governors.

"...Foremost we must rise above a partisan differences and be united in our efforts," they wrote.

-snip-

"There's an energy tsunami coming, and when you see it coming you better get on top of the wave, or you're going to get crushed by it," retired Marine General James Jones said in an interview.

-snip-


Bernanke JUST NOW said in testimony to the House Financial Services Committee being televised on CNBC that the biggest problem with oil is supply/demand fundamentals and that oil production IS NOT ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH DEMAND! His solution is CONSERVATION and ALTERNATIVES. And he's been giving these hints and clues for two days now.

At any rate, they're all practically SCREAMING that we have supply (fundamentals) challenges yet they do it in a nuanced fashion. THREE TIMES the chimp says we are in a transition period away from hydrocarbons.

You know, these people are trying to tell us something but I guess the message is just for those of us discerning enough, with regard to oil, that a finite resource can be depleted.

For those of us preparing for life with less energy, the worse we're doing is becoming prepared for an emergency even if there is no problem with oil production. For those who do no heed these warnings, you risk death from starvation, disease, or unattendable medical issues. After all, if there's not enough oil to supply your local grocer with food products or to make the many plastic thingamajigs present in a doctor's office or hospital, or fuel for an ambulance for that matter, you are in big trouble.

You go ahead and believe whatever you want though.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Speaking of OZ, by the way...
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 11:49 AM by Texas Explorer
The Australians are talking about, and taking action in light of, peak oil.



But some of us blame speculators.

Keep sitting on your hands.


Edited to add: By the way, Australian oil production peaked in 2000 and they are now in decline. The U.S. peaked in 1970-1971. Think the big dogs didn't notice that? Mexico is crashing and so is North Sea and Prudhoe. But oil will last forever. Yay!!!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
2. .....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
7. What? Nobody wants to talk about this? KICK! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terry in Austin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. The denial is deafening, Tex
It's gonna take 'em some time http://www.comics.com/wash/opus/archive/opus-20080629.html">to work through it...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Don't worry, Tex . . . You see, the world is one big Yergin-Lynch field
Now, it's true that individual wells, individual fields, oil-producing geological formations, states and nations may all initiate production, which will then rise to a peak and decline over time.

But since we're living in one big Yergin-Lynch field, none of this will have any effect on total global production, which will continue to increase forever!

Simple, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. So simple it's almost profoundly simple. We've got it made! Party on, dude!
Thanks for your support, hatrack. It's really nice to see you guys coming over from E&E to pick up my spirits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
9. Can I please get two more recs so we can discuss this issue? Thanks. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
10. Alaska oil production:
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 12:40 PM by Texas Explorer


Source: EIA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
11. United States Oil Production
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mcrfpus2a.htm



The United States now produces roughly the same amount of oil as we produced in 1947.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
12. Elephants where? Poppycock!
Quick, just find me a scapegoat while I wait for pictures of Brangelina's Babies!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Hey, Bob! Good to see you! Thanks for chimiing in on this. Perhaps
you could help me out? I wouldn't blame you if you didn't want to bother though. At any rate, I'm thankful for your support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. I've been saying this til I'm blue in the face.
Yes, there is speculation. Yes, there is corruption. No, we can't trust OPEC. No, we can't trust the Big Oil Companies. All of these issues have risen from a foundation of world oil production flatlining as world oil demand increases exponentially. You could blame Chindia, but hey, they just wanna be like us, right? Nothing wrong with that, right? Right?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. There has always been speculation. After all, THAT is what
commodities trading is by nature.

I'm blue in the face, too. But I'm also stubborn and persistent. But, alas, DUers won't have to put up with my PO activism for much longer. I'm sure they'll be blissfully thankful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
18. Oil still at $135 per barrell. Wow, you speculation theorist wackos
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 01:16 PM by Texas Explorer
sure showed me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tex-wyo-dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
19. K & R...
Hey TE...look at the bright side, I hear the fiddle industry is really booming!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Cool! Now all we need is a Violinist Idol. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
20. UK Oil Production:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
22. Norway Oil Production (Geez! Look at the exports line!):
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
23. It's quite simple
A little thought on this leads to the inescapable conclusion that our lives are gonna change drastically. Personal automobiles, suburbs, consumerism, that which is reality for the middle class, is gonna go away. It's just king hell denial.

Like the Roman said, "Goths, what Goths?".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
24. Oil-producing countries past peak of production:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
25. Export Land Model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_Land_Model

"The Export Land Model, or Export-Land Model, refers to work done by Dallas geologist Jeffrey Brown, building on the work of others, and discussed widely on The Oil Drum. It models the decline in oil exports that result when an exporting nation experiences both a peak in oil production and an increase in domestic oil consumption. In such cases, exports decline at a far faster rate than the decline in oil production alone.

A graph showing that rising domestic consumption of a locally produced resource will have a large negative effect on exports of that resource.The Export Land Model is important to petroleum importing nations because when the rate of global petroleum production peaks and begins to decline, the petroleum available on the world market will decline much more steeply than the decline in total production."

More at link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
26. HEY SPECULATION THEORIST WACKOS...
I'm waiting...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tex-wyo-dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
27. I guess we're just being "alarmists"...
Civilization's golden era is teetering on collapse

New millennium has brought a turning point in history, yet we ignore meltdown

Hans Tammemagi, Special to the Sun
Published: Saturday, June 28, 2008

The period from 1950 to 2000 will be remembered as the Golden Era of modern civilization, the pinnacle reached by humans after a million years of evolution. This brilliant half-century was sponsored largely by fossil fuels, especially oil, which brought unprecedented economic growth, plentiful transportation and a rich and diverse lifestyle.

But the new millennium has brought the end of cheap oil, and civilization is suddenly teetering on the edge of collapse. Even if we manage to scrape through (and it would require heroic efforts), life will change. We're at one of the most important turning points in history, yet we persistently ignore the coming meltdown and just want to party on. Nero would be proud.

So, why is civilization teetering? First, peak oil has arrived. There is no better signal than the price of oil, which has skyrocketed past $130 and shows no sign of slowing. Some shrug and claim there's still a lot left, technology will find it and extract it. Others, as represented by the editors of Maclean's magazine, feel that we have grappled with costly oil before and by applying determined conservation and new efficiencies, we will cope.

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Peak oil, this two-syllable piece of jargon, is another way of saying we are on the threshold of a major crisis. From now on the supply of oil will diminish each year, but population and demand will continue to grow. This is truly frightening because our modern industrial society is built on and totally dependent on this versatile fuel. It is the foundation for transportation, industry, agriculture, fishing and much more. As the gap between what economies and nations need and what they can get widens, bidding wars will erupt (they already have) and then shooting wars (one already has).

<more>

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=2eeece50-285f-4c4b-bb37-2d053d04d4e8

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
28. BS.! the price of oil is down because demand is down, people are driving less world-wide!!!
and the supply is passing the demand. sheeeeesh! -> at the current price of gas, oil will be down to $80.00 a barrel by January.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. What does the current price of gas have to do with what the price
of a barrel of oil will be in Jan 2009?

And could you please provide evidence in the form of linked sources which verify that supply has risen above demand?

Thanks in advance.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tex-wyo-dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Well, I'll give you that this is partially true...
as well as other factors (speculative market fluctuations, short term production/import changes, etc.), but you can't ignore long term trend fundamentals (continued increase in world-wide demand with decreased production capabilities, declines in major oil fields, etc.).

In short, things aren't looking pretty long term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terry in Austin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. That's more like it
Eighty dollars a barrel is just plain wishful thinking.

A realistic "floor" price is more like $110, if you shoot all the speculators and get the planets lined up just right. Matt Simmons argues that it's cheap at even twice the price.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
31. Non-Opec producers face stalling output
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 02:03 PM by Texas Explorer
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/73d47eaa-47d1-11dd-93ca-000077b07658.html">Financial Times



Countries outside the Opec oil cartel will barely be able to increase their production of crude oil over the next five years for the first time in the industry's history, the western countries' energy watchdog warned yesterday.

The International Energy Agency's dim forecast to 2013 suggested record oil prices have yet to balance sluggish supply with relatively robust demand.

"Structural demand growth in developing countries and ongoing supply constraints continue to paint a tight market picture over the medium term," the IEA said in its Medium-Term Oil Market Report.

Despite billions of dollars of investment, the challenge of pumping ever more oil out of ageing fields is proving so great that non-Opec countries will, in the next five year, have to rely on bio-fuels, such as corn-based ethanol, for 50 per cent of their growth in overall fuels.

The IEA said annual non-Opec supply growth, including biofuels, would slow to 0.5 per cent between 2008 and 2013. But demand, supported by rising incomes in developing countries such as China, would grow by 1.6 per cent a year.

Analysts warned the new forecast meant the world economy would rely more on Opec and oil prices were likely to remain elevated.

"Poor supply-side performance . . . in the face of strong demand pressures from developing countries has forced oil prices up sharply to curb demand," said the IEA.

-snip-


But, hey, what does the Financial Times know about shit anyway, right? What a bunch of conspiracy wackos they are.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Related: IEA: Little Non-Opec Production Gains Next Five Years
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
34. Here's some data to take it for what its worth
as far as looking forward:

Non-OPEC supply is seen rising 640 kb/d to 50.6 mb/d in 2009, following a late-year increase in 2008, with Asia, the Caspian, Brazil, Canada and the US adding to supplies. In addition, NGLs from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Nigeria and Iran underpin the 810 kb/d expansion in OPEC gas liquids in 2009.

OPEC crude supply increased by 350 kb/d in June to 32.4 mb/d, as Saudi Arabian supply rose to 9.45 mb/d and exports from floating storage lifted Iranian supply to 3.8 mb/d. Although higher supply lowers effective OPEC spare capacity to 1.7 mb/d, increases from Saudi Arabia, Angola, Iraq and Nigeria lift overall capacity by around 1.0 mb/d by end-2008.

-snip-

3Q08 global refinery throughput is revised down by 0.4 mb/d to 75.3 mb/d on weak OECD demand and poor margins. The addition of 2 mb/d of crude distillation capacity and significant investment in upgrading units elsewhere should keep gasoline markets well supplied and slightly ease middle distillate tightness during early 2009.

charts http://omrpublic.iea.org/balances.asp


http://omrpublic.iea.org/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
35. Those silly Kiwis...

http://www.sef.org.nz/papers/peak_oil_info_sheet.pdf

EF information sheet on the “Peak Oil” Issue for New Zealand Page 2 of 5
for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO)3, comprising experienced petroleum geologists, has recently predicted that the peak will occur in 2010. The more that world oil demand increases, the nearer the peak is likely to be.

It is difficult if not impossible to identify the date of the peak in advance. Oil prices rise and fall in response to a number of factors, including geopolitical factors, seasonal fluctuations in demand, economic growth levels, decisions by oil producers on production levels, and market psychology. An oil price rise does not prove that the peak is imminent; a fall in the oil price does not prove that it isn’t. And “peak” production may turn out to be a bumpy plateau rather than a sharp point. We may only know the date of the peak after it has occurred.

-snip-


OH GOD!!! Bumpy plateau? Noooooooo....!!!11!1



Funny that spike right at the end of the graph. Just happens to coincidentally coincides with the ramp-up of bio-fuels productions such as ethanol that the EIA decided to lump in with the former crude-only production data and which they now call the Total Liquids report. Now that it's been shown that ethanol production causes people to starve to death, we can expect that to turn back to the south. Sorta like this:

http://www.peakoil.nl/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/2008_july_oilwatch_monthly.pdf





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. It's best to use figures and sources without agendas
or ideologies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. So is ASPO a credible source without an agenda or can
we throw out all of those petro-geologists and engineers opinion with the bath water?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. "Petro-geologists work for oil companies, who have an agenda" -- DUer
Interesting how the same logic does not apply to global warming think tanks,

whose existence, after all, "presupposes the notion that global warming exists"

and is therefore biased.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. My arugument is not saying that worked oil fields do not reach
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 04:04 PM by mmonk
a point whereby they peak and then decline. My argument is that we are not at the point yet whereby the soaring prices of crude are based entirely on declining present production from existing sources. The prices would be more in line with decline over a longer period. There are also reserves that haven't come on line yet. All of you seem to be angry oil prices are falling as if it wasn't responding to various factors (and not all on bank runs as I have seen as the reasons here given, especially when the prices were rising before the current financial crisis) and those of us seeing it as overpriced as stupid people with our heads in the sand in facing the coming doom. My contention is the prices should be more in line with $80-$100 under given currency concerns. I do not see heavy shortages going into 2009. Do we want rational discussion or do we want dueling posts from sources that support only certain positions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. Escalating prices are not associated with shortages. Price controls are.
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 03:54 PM by Leopolds Ghost
If you let the prices escalate, shortages will not occur.

There is no shortage of platinum, despite that metal's scarcity.

"The market price" kills demand. That is the function of the market price.

There will be no shortages in the US until well past peak when we have
hit the price inelasticity point,

which, given the US pathetically low gas taxes and (directly related)
lack of money for rapid subways and mass transit, should be well above
the $8 a gallon that Europeans tolerate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. This isn't 1973. Therefore irrelevant.
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 03:57 PM by mmonk
Higher prices have resulted in about a 2% drop here in the U.S. in demand. With any drop in GDP, prices will fall some more. So I agree with your market price scenario less the wage and price controls of the 70's since we do not live in that environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #43
47. I said, there will be no shortages -- just increased prices killing demand over a long period.
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 04:49 PM by Leopolds Ghost
Just like the price of, say, carved stone buildings with hand-carved
moldings, once the only method of construction, has soared and
is now unaffordable for most. There is no shortage, people just
vcan't afford it anymore.

The state of the US economy will not cause oil prices to rise or fall.
Indeed, the continued inflastion of the dollar over the past 40 years
will offset any impact.

Only global depression would correct oil prices. Which is indeed the
sort of correction that decreased oil consumption would necessitate.

In fact, US demand had exactly zero effect on decreased supply and
increased demand overseas leading to skyrocketing prices, since US
demand actually dropped for the first time in decades. (Americans
are driving twice as much as they did in 1980.) Now we know what it
feels like to live in a dependent economy, like Bolivia or Lichtenstein.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. You also need to take into account $8 European gas
takes in money for other things provided by the state. Since I think based on current conditions that the price should be between $80-$100 and given they want a price cushion, I think the price of oil could drop into the $120 a barrel range. What do you think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. I say tax gas at a floor rate so that the market price stays $4 a gallon, use the money for transit
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 04:56 PM by Leopolds Ghost
Like the environmentalists, oil experts and Europeans were asking us to do
(in 1980s dollars) in the 1980s.

Note that this would count as a massive over-under bet that the
underlying price of gas will fall due to demand being killed in the
US if the price stays above $4 at the pump, which has only marginally
happened yet... if the price goes above $4 tax-free it could mean
NO money for mass transit, for example subways in Kansas City, etc.

Willing to take that bet?

Alternatively we could let the speculators drive up the price to $8
a gallon, tax it and institute price controls so that the price
remains $5 at the pump, thereby lowering gas prices to a figure still
above their supposed "unmanipulated" price, generating $1.50
per gallon for transit over and above the supposed "real" price of $3.50...

If no shortages occur as a result of legislating $4-5 gas long term,
it means you are right that there is no underlying supply deficit
caused by inelastic demand bidding up the remaining supplies until
someone is priced out of the market.

Of course, msassive inflation has been hiding domestic peak oil
from the public consciousness for 40 years now. In 10 years,
Americans will be fighting for their "right" to "cheap $5 gasoline".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. I could definitely go for such a tax for mass transit or alternative tech.
What about highway funds?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Indenturedebtor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #38
44. The speculators are the ones creating the market force through the Enron loophole
I don't think most people on this board or even anyone who pays attention at all (left or right) would argue with you that we're not at or approaching peak oil.

But in the meantime the speculators are massively driving the price up.

A better strategy would be to tax the crap out of gas, drive the speculators out of the market, and use the money to invest in renewable energy and an infrastructure to pipe that energy to people's homes so they can plug in their electric cars. Oh and build trains... lots and lots of trains.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. Such as...?
Read the entire comments section, the experts on commodity
pricing explain it all for you: this link merits its own DU thread.

http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/4224
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
36. "I think it was in the Rose Garden where I issued this brilliant statement:" -- Bush
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 02:46 PM by Leopolds Ghost
"If I had a magic wand -- but the President doesn't have a magic wand.

You just can't say, low gas."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
46. but but but i thought is was ALL supply and demand???
we're being played for fools
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terry in Austin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-17-08 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #46
50. No, it's not ALL supply and demand
Just mostly.

We're fools, definitely. Geology can be so cruel that way. X amount of oil supply, X+Y demand.

Party's over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 07th 2024, 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC