<This Week in Petroleum 9-26-07 The Oil Drum Declining net oil exports--a temporary decline or a long term trend?>
<DrumBeat: September 26, 2007 DrumBeat DrumBeat: September 28, 2007>

132 comments on DrumBeat: September 27, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version

westexas on September 27, 2007 - 10:10am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

EIA crude oil data for Saudi Arabia (year to date for 2007):

2005: 9.6 mbpd

2006: 9.2 mbpd (-4.3%/year)

2007: 8.6 mbpd (-6.7%/year)

If Saudi Arabia were to average 9.0 mbpd in the fourth quarter, the decline rate would still be -5.6%/year.

FYI, net export decline rates (total liquids, EIA), actual for 2006 and estimated for 2007 based on year to date production and +9% increase in consumption (Rembrandt's estimate for first half):

2006: -5.5%/year

2007: -11.0%/year

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
PeakTO on September 27, 2007 - 10:23am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

WT, as usual...the net export number is definitely the one we need to fear.

As you mention, even if they increase production by 400Kbpd in 4Q (4/5ths of the quota change) they won't show an increase this year.

By May 2008, we will have 3 years of declining world oil production. When does the rear view kick in?

However, I suspect that many factors will in play in the economic, oil, food, global political arenas before we get to then.

Crude oil STILL is only 11.7 cents(US) a cup.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
ilargi on September 27, 2007 - 10:37am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Crude oil STILL is only 11.7 cents(US) a cup.

I like that kind of number. It makes me wonder how much cheaper that same cup has gotten in Europe and Canada this September.

Or, as Mr. Colbert put it last night:

"Our first president now has the same value as their first president, a duck."
(Canada's 1 dollar coin features a loon)

Still, I'm asking myself what both your comments have to do with the graph from Apparent Peak's article.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
PeakTO on September 27, 2007 - 10:39am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Mine - nothing in particular...I was responding to WT's post.

My post below and on TOD Canada refers to the Apparent peak and his logistics analysis.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
SacredCowTipper on September 27, 2007 - 10:41am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The peak is just behind us (11/2005?) and the mortgage scam unwinding may allow the signal to remain mixed up in the noise for a while. I just hope we don't go into a new president 1/2009 with the administration able to hand wave and waste more time on this most pressing issue.

Posted before but here is the nice graph of just how ugly stuff gets from 1/2008 through 7/2008 on the ARM scam front.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/28/172611/602

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
vtfarmer on September 27, 2007 - 5:44pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

WT--

OPEC numbers for KSA give averages of:

Year Production Quota
2005 9.406 8.984
2006 9.141 9.035
2007 8.552 8.587

Is the production decline due to geological limitations or due to quota declines (and part of that decline will simply be getting within the quota since they had been pumping in excess of quota)? Are the quota declines intended to mask geological limitations or because the world economies aren't crashing as OPEC thought they would in the face of $40+ oil prices, so why should OPEC sell oil this year for $70 a barrel that it could sell next year for $90?

Also, if KSA could average 9 mbpd for the last half of 2007 (its quota is 8.9), doesn't that support the argument that the declines are political, not geological?

Rick

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

132 comments on DrumBeat: September 27, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version