DrumBeat: January 12, 2007
Posted by threadbot on January 12, 2007 - 9:05am
Topic: Miscellaneous

Assuming, for simplicity's sake, that the world reached its peak oil production back in 2005, that would mean that by 2025 there would be as much oil produced as there was in 1985. Fine, there was a lot of oil for the world in 1985. Only there's a slight hitch.By 2025, the world's demand for oil is going to be 60% greater than it is today, while production capacity is thrown back to 1985 levels. This is due to the world's rapidly growing population and increasing industrialization. China's annual oil consumption growth rate of 7.5% and India's of 5.5% are both expected to take a quantum leap over the next decade.
U.S. Boosts Iraq Force; Allies Pare Down (AP)
Is a Candu really the answer for Alberta's oilsands?
At first blush it seems like a pretty incongruous idea — to plunk a honking big nuclear reactor in the very heart of Alberta's oil patch, to help steam the raw bitumen from the thick tar sands.But as of this week, there are two serious oilsands players — Husky Energy Inc. and Total SA of France — who are publicly mulling the nuclear option. As well, four others, according to the biggest proponent of the plan, are quietly thinking about it.
Confronting our addiction to oil
There is a growing consensus amongst geologists that global oil production has either already peaked, or it will within the next few years. The most optimistic forecasts predict the peak to occur absolutely no later than 2035. Thereafter, even if industrial societies begin to switch to alternative energy sources, we will have less net energy each year to do all the work essential to the survival of complex societies. We are entering a new era, as different from the industrial era as the latter was from medieval times.
Justice, Farms and Victory Gardens
In the years immediately before the industrial revolution, it took 6 farming households to support one single doctor, teacher, lawyer or artist and her household.
John Michael Greer: This faith in progress
We have our heaven and our Golden Age, too, but unlike most other cultures we put ours in the future, and tell ourselves that we’re moving closer to Paradise with every day that passes. Other cultures put their faith in gods or stars or cosmic cycles; we put ours in progress.
Independence from the Corporate Global Economy
But what's the alternative? We're taught that there are only two possible economic choices: capitalism—a system in which rich people and corporations have the power, make the decisions, and control our lives; or communism—a system where state bureaucrats have the power, make the decisions, and control our lives. What a choice!When it comes to real economic alternatives, our imaginations are stuck. Clearly, we need something different, but what would it look like? How do we start to imagine and create other ways of meeting our economic needs?
Jan Lundberg: The Only Hope Is Unity
When people unite to fight a great, imminent threat, as I predict we will, as events and developments accelerate, there will be rapid progress towards addressing problems. This may occur concurrently with desperate and antisocial behavior especially as fuel and food shortages strike. The climate's active distortion seems about to painfully kick many more people "upside the head like a two-by-four," as Julia Butterfly characterized the common stubbornness to overdue change.
Stratfor: Global Market Brief: Europe's Long-Term Energy Proposal
The European Commission on Jan. 10 issued a set of proposals aimed at mitigating Europe's long-standing reliance on third-parties, especially Russia, for energy supplies. The plan, to be presented to all 27 member countries at the EU summit in March, focuses on heightening cross-border cooperation and reducing Europe's dependence on oil and natural gas.
To pre-empt an energy cut-off by Russia, Europeans need to make huge investments to build new supply lines, reserve supplies and distribution channels.That would mean a gigantic diversion of money and resources from social sector development programs. Though Europeans have a genuinely hard choice in hand, they have to act quickly.
Chile Protest Dams In Coyaique
The main justification for the dams is their promise to free Chile from dependence on Argentine natural gas and alleviate the current “energy crisis.”However, as of March 2006, domestic consumption accounts for only 15 percent of national energy, use while industrial use accounts for more than 60 percent. According to ENDESA’s justification statement in 2005, Chile’s demand for electricity will double in ten years and triple in twenty, mainly due to proposed mining projects between 2008-2017. The fact that they mentioned such growth in their original proposal indicates to the Coalition that budding mining projects like that in Pascua Lama are the designed recipients of the dams 2,400 MW, not Chilean households.
No Progress in South Korean Talks on Kidnapped Workers' Release in Nigeria
Officials of a South Korean construction company began negotiating terms Thursday [11 January] for the release of the company's nine South Korean employees who were abducted a day earlier in Nigeria by a group of armed insurgents, but the initial contact ended shortly without any progress, a Foreign Ministry official said. The kidnapped workers remained safe, according to the official. But the official refused to reveal the kidnappers' demands, citing safety concerns.
Analysts: Nigeria May Be Hot Spot For Terrorism in West Africa
While current U.S. military attention is focused on removing possible al-Qaida cells in Somalia, some analysts say terrorist threats from other parts of Africa should also be closely monitored. They say Nigeria's violence-wracked, oil-rich Niger Delta could become a new theater for terrorism.
Energy crunch looms as southern Africa economies boom
JOHANNESBURG - Home to some of Africa's fastest growing economies, southern Africa is on the cusp of an energy crisis that threatens to clip industrial growth and stymie plans to deliver electricity to millions without.Power utilities throughout the region are struggling to cope with increasingly frequent blackouts that are hampering operations at factories and mines and darkening homes in cities stretching from Cape Town to Kinshasa.
Jordan: Ship laden with 5,700 tonnes of LPG docks at Aqaba Port
The Jordan Petroleum Refinery Company (JPRC) on Thursday said the crisis over a shortage of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) during the past few weeks is over now, following the arrival of an Egyptian ship laden with 5,700 tonnes of LPG from Saudi Aramco....The recent shortage of gas cylinders that led to a nationwide crisis was attributed to the JPRC's low production levels and a sharp increase in demand as a result of two cold fronts with heavy rain and snowfall, which closed roads in the southern part of the country and prevented trucks from reaching the capital.
Albania: Prime Minister Berisha blames KESH and ERE for the energy crisis
Prime Minister Sali Berisha put the blame yesterday on KESH - the Albanian Power Corporation (APC) and the Energy Regulatory Entity (ERE) for the recent increased power cuts.
Chevron, Statoil Exposed to Venezuela Push to Control Gas
In 2003, Statoil and Chevron Corp. took advantage of business-friendly natural gas laws to launch multi-billion-dollar offshore projects in Venezuela's Atlantic waters.Four years later, President Hugo Chavez is changing the rules, demanding majority control of projects they expected to operate themselves. Venezuela hopes to begin exporting natural gas before the end of the decade, but the contract uncertainty will likely slow the development of existing projects and push new licensing rounds off corporate radar screens.
Gartner Urges IT and Business Leaders to Wake up to IT's Energy Crisis
Organisations are under mounting pressure to develop ‘greener’ approaches towards their information technology (IT) practices, and IT and business leaders need to wake up to the issues of spiralling energy consumption and environmental legislation, according to Gartner, Inc. Although technology can help reduce the impact of some environmental problems, its potential harmful effect is receiving increasing attention from environmentalists and policy makers alike.
Energy Costs: 'If You Don't Manage It, It Will Manage You'
As with taxes, everyone seems to complain about "the energy crisis," but no one seems to do anything about it.
Saudi Arabia: Institute Planned to Build Energy Cadre
The institute will meet the growing demand for the right workforce in this vital sector. Abdullah Jumah, the CEO of Saudi Aramco, has said that the global oil industry was now reaping a poor harvest from the shortsighted human resource policies of the past.
2007: Renewable Energy Gets Real, Part One
First and foremost, I think it’s clear that 2007 is the year when renewable energy finally gets real. That is, it will make sense as an investment just on the return alone, no matter what your politics or your view on climate change may be. This tipping point for RE has been awaited for so long that the veterans in the wind and solar businesses (especially) have grown gray and wrinkled, waiting at the altar with a handful of long-dried brown flowers while their beards grew to the floor. But no more. This is it, baby!
Mr Sarich became a household name in the 1970s when he invented his orbital engine, which was 40 per cent lighter, 60per cent smaller and 35 per cent more efficient than standard car engines.Why it never took off in cars remains in dispute, but the sophisticated fuel-injection and combustion system was developed for use in two-stroke engines and is used today in boat engines, motorbikes, lawnmowers and some small cars.
Jerome Corsi: A 'Switch Grass' Energy Solution?
“Why do people only believe bad news about energy?” This question was often posed by Julian Simon, a now deceased University of Maryland professor of business administration, who had the courage to argue that “peak” theories about energy resources are typically hoaxes.Unfortunately, President Bush appears to be a “peak oil” believer who has a strong predisposition that using carbon fuels is somehow bad.
Ali Samsam Bakhtiari: Will crude slip further?
One of the sure signs that we have passed peak oil in 2006 is the price during the summer, which is 50% higher than it was during the winter.
Top oil exporter Saudi Arabia will deepen crude supply curbs to Asian refiners next month to comply with Opec's second output cut, industry sources said yesterday, but the news failed to stem a sharp slide in prices.
So why, against all this background, is the US so bent on attacking Iran? Two considerations are probably decisive. One is that President Bush clearly sees his role in the Middle East in messianic terms and will not let does-not-make-sense arguments stand in the way of what he regards as his manifest destiny. The other is oil. Iran holds the world's largest supplies of oil after Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and holds more oil and gas combined than any other country on the planet. As Peak Oil rapidly approaches, the US demand to control the lion's share of what is left - pitifully short-sighted though such a policy is - is now the dominant driving geopolitical force in world politics today.
The Great Emergency: Global Warming, Mass Death and Resource Wars in the 21st Century
The feel good approach Gore pushes is dead wrong: Economic growth and saving life on Earth are not compatible goals. Industrial civilization isn’t harming the Earth, it’s killing the Earth. The system has long since passed the limits of growth - it can’t be sustained.
Resident to discuss Peak Oil at conference
Bill and Sydney Blackwell, founders of Harvard Local, have been working to create community awareness of issues related to fossil fuel depletion, as predicted by Richard Heinberg and other leading experts on the subject.
BEIJING -- China imported 14.5% more crude oil last year than in 2005, and imports are likely to continue growing in the double-digits in 2007 as the country's economy shows no sign of slowing down and more of its strategic petroleum-reserve tanks become ready for use.The data and expectations of continued demand growth add to the worries of global energy and security experts who believe China's growing need for foreign oil to supplement stagnant domestic output is contributing to an unsustainable global energy future.
Exxon cuts ties to global warming skeptics
NEW YORK - Oil major Exxon Mobil Corp. is engaging in industry talks on possible U.S. greenhouse gas emissions regulations and has stopped funding groups skeptical of global warming claims — a move experts said could indicate a change in stance from the long-time foe of limits on heat-trapping gases.
California plans major carbon cut in its gasoline
ow that California is on record as mandating a 25 percent cut in the state's greenhouse-gas emissions by 2020 - a move that made headlines worldwide four months ago - leaders here are starting to lay out how they intend to hit that ambitious mark. First up: requiring transportation fuels sold in California to contain less carbon, a major greenhouse gas.
Tories push for 80% carbon emissions cut
The Government may be forced by MPs to adopt tougher targets to reduce carbon emissions in order to step up its fight against climate change.
Kyoto Protocol: France trims carbon pollution in 2005
Congress to reconsider caps on carbon
WASHINGTON - Potential presidential rivals John McCain and Barack Obama are joining with newly independent Sen. Joe Lieberman on a plan they say would reduce annual global-warming gases by two-thirds by mid-century.
Europe's oil shock ... and opportunity
Strongmen make weak partners, as Europe had to learn again this week. For the second time in a year, Russian leader Vladimir Putin cut off fuel exports to the Continent in a money dispute with a former Soviet satellite that is a pipeline transit state. This is not Europe's idea of energy security or of trusted neighbors.
Fears of superhigh-priced oil, including petroleum reaching $100 a barrel, are receding, at least for now, as crude's cost continues to plunge.



Looking at Total Imports
If you go to: Weekly Petroleum Status Report Then click on 8 U.S. Imports of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products “XLS”, This brings up an Excel spreadsheet of the data. Here you can get the weekly import data of crude oil all the way back to August of 1982 though Total Imports only go back to 1991.
The first thing you may notice is that as US production has dropped and US consumption has increased over the years, total imports have gradually increased over the years. They were around 7 million barrels per day in early 1991 and passed 14 million barrels per day this past summer. They are hovering around 12.7 million barrels per day right now.
You can copy and paste this data into your own spreadsheet. I did and charted it. The weekly data jumps around so fast only a general trend can be discerned. However you can do a 10 week moving average and get a much better picture of what is happening. A 10 week moving average shows total imports at the lowest point in over two and one half years. You must go back to May of 2004 before the 10 week average of total imports were lower than today.
The data also includes Net Imports, That is imports minus exports. When you do that you must go back another two months, to March 2004 before you hit a lower point than today for the ten week moving average.
One more point, If you go to This Week in Petroleum you will see that crude oil inventories this past week are exactly 4 million barrels below the same week last year and are at their lowest point in over a year.
Right now inventories are sitting at 314.7 million barrels. At this point last year we were at 318.7 million barrels and that was just before inventories began their meteoric rise that eventually topped out at 347 million barrels in June. I am betting that in June of 2007 we will be well below 300 million barrels, in the lower part of the five year range if not below it.
Ron Patterson
Darwin: Thanks for all the work. It is my understanding that 270 million is pretty well the absolute minimum before supply problems arise so it should be interesting.
Long time lurker, first time caller.
Thanks for the info on the inventory status, Ron. I have a question that I'm having a hard time wrapping my admittedly non-technical mind around, and I was wondering if you could help conceptualize it for me (anyone else is welcome to do so, as well!): why, in the face of this kind of news, has the average gasoline price in my area (mid-central Indiana) dropped to $1.99/gal for the first time in a long, long time?
I do not ask this with any facetious sense at all; I'm trying to understand the relationship between the global oil status and what it means to the average consumer (ie. me). Where is the market response to the observable plateau in production upon which we are currently sitting?
Anticipatory thanks, by the way...!
Quijohn, welcome to the Oil Drum!
The answer to your question-who knows? If oil prices followed some type of logic that I could discern, I'd be very rich.
why, in the face of this kind of news, has the average gasoline price in my area (mid-central Indiana) dropped to $1.99/gal for the first time in a long, long time?
Product inventories are high and have been climbing. If the trend continues, the price will keep falling. Margins have been eroding, so I expect to see some of the excess removed by refiners slowing down a bit. But gasoline inventories are near the top of the range for this time of year, and have been climbing steadily. That indicates that lower prices and/or reduced refinery runs are on the way.
You've also hit on a point that isn't always clear in TOD.
1. we have (a pretty) good idea of world demand
2. we have a (somewhat good) idea of world inventories
3. world supply we have a poor fix on (because there are incentives out there to lie eg Iraq exports a lot of oil as 'smuggling' which is not recorded and also OPEC countries cheat on their quotas etc)
4. we have no good picture of reserves for at least half the world (see Twilight in the Desert by Matt Simmons re Saudi Reserve data, or any of the powerpoints on the Simmons & Co. website)
Demand +/- changes in inventory = Supply
So supply always equals demand. The way the 2 are made to come together at one point is *price*.
If we were at peak oil *now*, then given that demand is still rising, price would be shooting through the roof. It will do that because demand for oil is quite inelastic to price (2/3rds of oil use is in transportation, and it's not easy for the global economy to give up transporting things and people) and supply of oil is also quite inelastic to price (you have to find oil to produce more of it, and that takes time).
Now (4) tells us we don't know when Peak Oil will come. It could be tomorrow morning.
We can observe price, and price is not shooting up. Given that oil demand is apparently still rising, oil inventories are not plunging, we are not at peak oil.
Value, oil demand is not nearley as inelastic as you seem to think. Methinks you are comparing the US with the rest of the world and assuming they are very much alike. That is far from the truth. Many small countries that use crude or diesel for power generation is cutting back drastically. Blackouts are increasing dramatically in all third world countries. Everywhere lower income people are consuming less and less.
Bottom line, with the recent OPEC cuts the world is producing about one million barrels per day less than it was in the summer of 2005. And of course we are consuming about one million barrels per day less. Though consumption was not dramatically affected by the rise in the price of oil in 05, the high cost of oil has finally started to squeeze the consuming public, especially in the undeveloped world.
Theories count for nothing Value, if the the data tells a different story. As Matt Simmons is fond of saying; "Data trumps all theories." And so far the data tells us that we are at peak right now. We have been on the plateau for about two years. You just cannot argue with the data, though some people foolishly try to do that.
Ron Patterson
And so far the data tells us that we are at peak right now.
Of course used in that way, the data would have told us several times in the past we were at peak.
Data is subject to interpretation. Oil production goes flat or declines for other reasons than a production peak, as has been witnessed multiple times in the past.
Robert, with all due respect, I did say so far!
Now having said that, I think it is extremely foolish to declare, as Value did, that we are definitely not at peak because of the price of oil. The world has, without a doubt, produced less oil in 2006 than in 2005. Looking at that fact alone I think it is extremly foolish to say that we cannot be at peak because of the price of oil.
And just one more very important point! Before the OPEC cuts went into effect on October 1st, we were already below 2005 levels of production. A plateau of two years along with a slight drop in production, has never before in the history of the world happened except in the case of OPEC deliberately cutting production, Iran-Iraq war and the following tanker wars, or the collapse of the Soviet Union causing a cut in production.
I get so damn tired of people pointing to past drops in world oil production without giving us the cause of these drops! This time, before November 1st of 2006, that a plateau of two years and a drop happened while all the world was producing flat out. This has never happened before and that fact should simply should not be overlooked.
Ron Patterson
This time, before November 1st of 2006, that a plateau of two years and a drop happened while all the world was producing flat out.
That last portion, though, is not a fact. It is your opinion. In fact, "all the world" certainly wasn't producing flat out, as I have argued before. Canada was not producing flat out. But even in the Middle East, Saudi had already made the statement that they were having trouble finding buyers. They had already made cuts. You simply choose to believe that they were lying about the statement they made.
Ad the Saudis not having buyers for their oil in June 2006, when NYMEX light sweet was 70 $/b plus.
In 2006 if Aramco - like CERA and others - believed that the price of oil soon (within a year or two) would fall, then how come they didn't lower the price a little?
It has been argued (Robert) that an eventual bluff easily could be nuked by someone simply buying oil from the Saudis. IMO, this is not an evidence for spare production capacity. We all believe the Saudis have tank farms, don't we?
An explanation to my question could be ECONish, that maximizing the profit means producing less than 100%. Personally i don't think the Saudis are free to produce less. Such behaviour would not be tolerated by Uncle Sam, which i think has lot of tools to utilize when exercising power. But this of course, is just an opinion. I'm sure there are knowledgeable generalists, like Sailorman and others, that has a more qualified say on this than I.
I just watched "Lawrence of Arabia" again. Anybody who thinks Arabs are likely to act in their long-term best interests should watch that movie.
Can the Saudis restrict output to boost prices and hence revenues? Heck yes they can; Uncle Sam does not get to peek at their books (which assumes, BTW, that the Saudis know how much they are producing--highly questionable IMO).
So what are the Saudis doing?
1. Nobody knows.
2. That probably includes the Saudis. Why assume that they know what their production capacity is--not to mention their reserves?
It is always a great mistake in human affairs to assume that the other guy knows what he is doing.
Am I missing something here? You are being ironic?
I assume that Aramco has a functional hierarchy, reporting oil output to the top dogs, wouldn't you?
US knowledge of KSA internal affairs?
There is quite a few Saudis with cultural links to US; education, business et cetera. I can easily imagine Uncle Sam having many informants in KSA. But of course, it's just unqualified speculations. I know very little about KSA.
Here in Norway, US knowledge of internal affairs caused big headlines recently. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, the inner circle of the cabinet had secret discussions. The former prime minister, Kjell Magne Bondevik, revealed in his biography that the ambassador in Washington, Mr. Vollebæk, got those discussions referred in a meeting with the state department. It was the state department who initiated the meeting.
The secret discussion was limited to a group of five ministers (prime, finance, foreign, defence and justice) and their apparatus.
So, either the US is exercising technical surveillance on Norway's "white house", or they had a mold inside the apparatus of the inner cabinet. At least, that is my interpretation of that event.
I was not being ironic. Norway is not KSA. Norwegians have been counting accurately every single herring they have caught for the past thousand years.
The people I have reason to believe who know the most about KSA oil production claim to know the least. (Those with claims of knowledge about Saudi production and reserves have no consensus nor any strong claim to such knowledge.)
My position on KSA is based almost entirely on Matt Simmons, "Twighlight in the Desert."
Well said. You seem to have a talent for summing it all up in one sentence. You should write books. We should all spend less time reading Westexas and more time letting you shake the fuzzy dice.
First of all, thanks to all of the thoughtful responses.
Now, as to this:
Regarding our current inventory level, which as Robert pointed out:
...is it that our inventories are filling up at the expense of these Third World countries? Is there any data to support decreased consumption/demand in these countries? It makes a modicum of sense that if these countries have indeed "bowed out" of the oil bidding for the time being, the increase in supply would result in a lower cost, which (if I understand you all correctly) could very well explain why the inventories have been climbing (ie. "buy it while it's down and store it for when it isn't").
But if that isn't the explanation, what other things could be responsible for the current mix of low price points & high inventories, again, when viewed in light of the plateau that I see time and again by the many impressive graphs around here? :)
Again, I apologize if any of this seems pedantic or redundant. I'm just trying to research this and come up with responses to potential questions about PO - it's hard to convince somebody to that PO should be a concern when the gas pumps don't reflect it. It's the old "Who do you believe? Me or your lying eyes?" issue.
Well, for starters our inventories are not filling up. While it is true that gasoline and distillate inventories are up, crude inventories are down by a greater amount. All in all, inventories are down.
The power and gasoline problems in developing countries has been in the news frequently lately. And they always give the high price of oil as the problem. That being said however, developed countries are cutting their consumption also.
OECD demand for 2005 49,601,000 barrels per day.
OECD demand for 2006 48,923,000 barrels per day. (First 9 months avg.)
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/t17.xls
There is all the proof you need. High prices are pushing demand down everywhere. And inventories are decreasing, not increasing. Inventory days of supply for OECD nations were at the top of their range during the third quarter of 2006, dropped to near the middle of the range at the end of the fourth quarter and are expected to drop to the bottom of the range in 2007.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html
Ron Patterson
North American demand dropped 0.064-mbd in 2006, while Asian demand grew 0.339-mbd. And non-oecd natins were just part of it. Latin American grew demand by 0.109-mbd. In all, global demand grew by 0.91-mbd in 2006, almost all that coming from non-OPEC producting nations. There is much disinformation at TOD.
Have prices since my inventory warning last year reflected my reporting of events and facts or that of the Peaksters?
There are also many reasons why consumption of oil might drop besides the price of oil, i.e. general economic slowdown because of multiple reasons, some probably energy-related, many more strictly economy related (falling housing market, etc).
It seems to me that the global crude oil market is so huge that a few fractions of percent of drop in consumption over a critical mass of consuming economies can cause high volatility in prices. In other words, there is a huge amount of 'slop' in the markets in terms of trading prices and anticipations of supply/demand, even while there may not be this 'slop' in terms of actual supply. IMO we could go several years beyond peak before the 'noise' in the economy, including possibility of deep recession, will give away to clear trendlines indicating economic realization of the peak.
This is why (if it wasn't clear already :) I think WT and RR could be both essentially correct, just looking at the situation in different lights.
I believe "price" in an open/free marketplace would be a good indicator in this situation. I am not convinced crude oil prices are set in an open/free marketplace. If there is any manipulation going on, then the price will never be a good indicator.
The Global Distribution Map i posted this week (http://trendlines.ca/energy.htm#misc) shows that every barrel not taken up by usa & europe went to non-oecd nations. There are a few TOD dieoff fans like Ron et al that want us to believe there was extreme hardship around the world last year due to high prices. Anecdotal and out of proportion.
We now know that the price spike in 2006 was artificial. The 1.7-mbd in surplus supply went to inventories. The demand destruction in the West went to asia. This is not rocket science.
Exports compared to a year ago are bunk. The global export/import patterns were skewed by the Gulf Hurricanes. Tankers were diverted. Now all is back to normal. In 2006, the usa produced within 40-kbd of 2005 volume. In 2006, usa nat'l gas production exceeded 2005 by 2.9% and TEOTWAWKI did not happen despite all the forecasts by some of the TOD pundits from the lunatic fringe.
Please mister Hutter, be more polite.
Tell me, why do you bother to read and post at TOD, which obviously is a peak oil freak show?
Is "debunking" Ron and others your idea of public service, being useful for the community? It would be better if you spent your energy on expanding on the ideas here, and of course exercise your intellect to criticise. IMO most of your posts are not honest criticism. It's mainly rhetorics and a strong bias without acknowledging others views, certainly not a quest for reality and truth.
Freddy is usually full of it, but in this case he is even more full of crap. No one is comparing the entire year Freddy, I was using a 10 week moving average. What about the eight months before the hurricanes?
What about the first 9 months of 2006? Why are total imports, using a 10 week moving average, lower now than any time in the last 31 months? Did hurricanes skew the production for two and one half years, when about half those months were before the hurricanes?
I was using a 10 week moving average and comparing it with every other 10 week average over two and one half years.
Sometimes Freddy, you just open your mouth and stick your foot all the way down your throat.
Ron Patterson
Nobody really cares about your ten-week avg, ronny. I sure don't. It indicates dick all. And i have never commented about your academic exercise; so i don't know why u are on a tirade.
Jeffrey is the Poster claiming that Exports today compared to a year ago (hurricane episode) is relevant. And i addressed that ridiculous comparison. That's all.
He is clearly wrong. And u are lost in space.
But don't let me stop u from taking a moment to explain to us why we should care that exports in Q4 down from 2004 should concern us...
Over the last nine months there have been several issues wrt inventory, non-OPEC supply growth, OPEC quota reductions & usa Demand destruction that i have addressed since October. All my statements and suppositions are backed by posted graphs and stats (some of which are still posted at http://www.trendlines.ca/energy.htm#misc
OTOH, u and Jeffrey are involved in alotta hokus pokus rhetoric mixed with baseless claims of decay in KSA, Russia, etc etc.
My explanations follow the price movement and geopolitical action impecably. Yours takes a leap of faith worthy of a fundamentalist religious zealot.
I am content to watch the world and event unfold as they should. U and westexas are eating up our bandwidth with your daily repetitive bund as if saying it a hundred times will finally convince us via some sort of fatigue factor.
Oil futures fell another five bucks this week. WT and u lost much more than that in credibility...
Peaksters defended the post Iraq2 price hikes as proof of Peak. Now that they recede, it's supposedly just a correction. Yup.
I have defended $50 contract prices as the equilibrium price for 18 months. I warned that there was a fear component and surplus capacity issues and thus prices could not sustain their recessionary heights.
Folks can believe your off-the-wall rants or my data supported outlines. Since 2003, your luv affair with EIA stats has made u look foolish in your retractions and false accusations. My IEA figures have been consistent in both forecasting upcoming events that i have posted and explaining past trends.
Do you have no shame, Fraudy, to be back here lying when I just showed that you can't even report accurately the weather in your own town?
today we learn that the lunatic fringe no longer takes the weekend off...
If oil is like other markets, the price is determined at the margin. If there is one extra barrel of oil with no buyers the price will fall to find a buyer. Likewise if there is a buyer for one barrel of oil and no sellers, the price will rise to find a seller. This is why commodities are so volatile. The actual physical amount available is irrelevant in the futures market since it is all paper barrels. In the corn market, with which I am more familiar, the bins can be nearly empty of corn just before harvest and yet the price of corn will fall. The futures market which determines the cash price is anticipating the harvest and lowering the price (normally). Likewise after the harvest, normally, the bins on the farm are full of grain, but the price of corn normally rises. I know these seems counter intuitive, but that is the way it normally works. This past harvest was unusual in that prices rose at harvest, a rare event. In the case of oil, I would suspect that the market is anticipating an over supply in the future. The declining inventories now are irrelevant. It is a futures market of paper barrels. Possibly the rapid expansion of ethanol is lessoning the need for crude oil as there will be ample supply of motor fuel at the margin. Add in the global warming effect and you get an over supply at the margin, which is turn decides the price for all the crude. The physical inventory numbers are irrelevant to price. However they could still indicate that peak oil is near or here already, it's just that ethanol and global warming are mitigating the effects at the moment. This can all change overnight.
Briefly, it is clear that world oil traders/companies do not believe we are peak right now (whether we are or aren't, people's behavior reflects primarily what they believe), crude prices have fallen from their high, no new obvious threats to oil supply have emerged (I think the concerns with Nigeria and Iraq have gone somewhat stale) and there is no shortage of supply - at least for the developed world. The question is given these factors, why wouldn't prices be dropping? Supply/demand imbalance will have to become much more evident for prices to really climb again in the absence of another new major supply threat (such as terrorism in SA).
There exists a certain knock-out effect too. I don't know how common it is, but if somebody is forced out of oil because of too high prices, he/she/it might just not rely on oil ever again even if the price falls back down. This is a bit more permanent type of demand destruction. This sort of behavior might also prevent the price of oil from ever rising into astronomical levels. It's a slow squeeze and financial entities (people, firms, countries..) are dropping out of the game one by one. A small player drops and the price growth slows down a bit. A large player drops and the price drops a bit. A very large player (or lots of smaller ones) drop out and the price just falls like a rock. Ofcourse the supply still keeps shrinking so the prices start to go up again.
Yes, I know this is quite obvious to many and the rest just probably disagree but this is my point of view.
U have described the process wonderfully. In 1998/99, many new users were drawn to petroleum use, both domestically and commercially. At that time, if anyone suggested crude cost would rise from $15 to $69 within ten years, they would be considered insane.
And so they became part of demand. As the baseline Price rises, those fringe users get knocked out of the game. At present, many are hoping that the baseline is still about $40 i.e. the contract price will still see $40 in the price troughs. Today it is $51. And as the fear premium and geopolitical premiums as price components extinquish, we are finding out this month where that bottom is.
IEA is advising that non-OPEC supply will increase 1.7-mbd in 2007. This plus their 0.65-mbd increase in 2006 will far surpass announced OPEC quota cuts to date. OPEC's next scheduled talks are in March.
It appears to me that in a 'just in time' world the the price of oil is only linked with fulfilling current physical trades. With remarkably warm weather in the northern hemisphere and low heating demand, no hurricane outages this year and no geopolitical issues stopping any major production there is no shortage at the current prices.
The situation with North American gas should however serve as a warning, (Perhaps also the major daily shifts in UK prices that frequently now happen.) post Katrina over $15.00 currently $6.60 with lots of price volatility. From the posts here we know that ongoing North American gas suppy is going to be critical in a short space of time with production in steep decline. However the JIT culture only 'sees' the immediate requirement and the price swings to enable current delivery. The futures market also seems to be deeply anchored in the 'now' with no consideration of potential production shortfalls that will result from resource depletion.
Its this kind of 'now' culture that I am sure is the prime driver of the oil price.
One more point, If you go to This Week in Petroleum you will see that crude oil inventories this past week are exactly 4 million barrels below the same week last year and are at their lowest point in over a year.
Yet we are still above the historical range for this time of year. We would have to drop another 25 million barrels just to get to the average portion of the range. High inventories amount to idle money. After Katrina, a lot of refiners started to keep higher inventories, but that memory is fading. I think inventories will continue to drift down until they are back in a more average range for the specific time of year.
The other thing to keep an eye on is product inventories. They have been climbing, and if they continue to climb refiners will start to cut refinery runs (and prices will continue to fall). This