Consumption is only part of the story.

The key indicator of the net export decline rate is consumption as a percentage of production at the final peak. And the overall UK net export decline rate was -55%/year, with flat consumption, because of their high consumption as a percentage of production. In any case, it's just a question of how rapid the net export decline rate is.

But a key point to keep in mind is what I call Phase One and Phase Two Net Export Declines. In Phase One, cash flows from export sales increases, even as volumes decline, because of rising oil prices. In Phase Two, cash flows from export sales decline, as volumes decline, because rising oil prices can't offset the volume decline.

Westexas:

I love your work, man, but this is silly. The UK and Indonesia could only go to zero because there was someone else exporting. You can't use the same decline rates for Iran, Russia and SA because the effect on the world price will be totally different when the exports from the last few big exporters start to decline and that will affect domestic consumption.

Now, the asymptotic approach to zero isn't going to be a picnic, but it seems certain that exports will continue at gradually diminishing levels until the end of the oil age. The threat of military action by the US on behalf of energy importers (whether they wish to acknowledge it or not) will keep markets "well supplied" as OPEC ministers love to say.

At what prices we will have to see. But the oil will be flowing.

As I said elsewhere, it's not the last half of the net export decline that causes the immediate problems for importers. It's the first half. Whether some key net exporters maintain some low level of exports for a long time is not really relevant once the world net oil export market has largely collapsed.

In "our" (Khebab did all of the hard work) presentation at ASPO-USA, we used low case, middle case and high case projections of production (based on HL) and consumption (based on a Monte Carlo analysis of prior consumption).