Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
- Passive Solar Design Overview – Part 1
- Radical Retrenchment - A Reference Model
- TOD:Campfire RSS feed
TOD:Europe
- SER-2 [01] Introduction
- The Russian Bear?
- The Permanent Oil Crisis Conference in Amsterdam, January 21 & 22, 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- 2009: Predictions for Australia
- The Bullroarer - Tuesday 6th January 2009
- The Bullroarer - Monday 29th December 2008
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
“For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.”
—Richard Feynman
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Prof. Goose, Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Heading Out
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Khebab, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Local: Glenn
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
I've marked in red the 12 times since the beginning of 2004 that oil has moved in either direction by $10 or more within 2 months. Some of these moves occured in as little as a month.
The next question is, how many times has it traded in a $20 band for 2 full months?
I'll be the 9th one to pick the $53 option, with the caveat that like SAT I am not particularly fond of the phrasing. I think that the chances of hitting either extreme (combined) are double that of trading in this $20 range. I think the distribution should be 33%-33%-33% instead of the current 10%-60%-30%.
I wanted to do more than "up" or "down" from today. That's not very interesting. So, I had to pick a time horizon and some sort of constraint.
If you wanted a 33-33-33 distribution, the middle range would have had to have been smaller, not larger, right?
so, perhaps a better way would be, "which is the next price point we hit," or something like that?
Yeah, like maybe 5 price ranges instead of 3.
I'd choose between $0 and $infinity. I'd be guaranteed a gloat for being correct. Unless of course they have to start paying to have it hauled away. So I guess I'd have to make it $-infinity to $+infinity for a 100% guarantee.
To me this poll has two different things: there's the "range" and the "which one first." It would seem better to separate the two, have one that asks about ranges, but still ask which specific amount is likely to be reached first. Then there's a more nitpicky thing about "remaining in $## - $## range"...is it nullified if it steps out of that range just once? Or is it valid if it stays in that range 95% of the time?