![]() | DrumBeat: May 18, 2008 | The Oil Drum | A quote from Obama in Oregon..."We can't eat as much as we want...and then expect other countries...to say OK" | ![]() |
105 comments on POLL: Oil Breaks $127, Now What?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
105 comments on POLL: Oil Breaks $127, Now What?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
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
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
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
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
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.
“This order [i.e. capitalism] is now bound to the technical and economic conditions of machine production which today determine the lives of all the individuals who are born into this mechanism, not only those directly concerned with the economic acquisition, with irresistible force. Perhaps it will so determine them until the last ton of fossilized coal is burnt.”
—Max Weber, 1905
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- 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
In the April 16th poll I picked oil would stay in the range of 103-127, and in fact it just breached 127, so I was just a tad bit too conservative on that poll. So on this one I've selected it will breach 140.
Also, after the rocky plateau of crude extraction, which first occurred in May of 05, the price of oil over the next 2 years doubled, then doubled again in just 1 year, so one might be bold enough to predict oil would double again in 6 months, which would occur in November of this year. Of course the higher the price the more drag it will put on the economy, so there probably is some point where price balances with economic activity. However, there still appears to be room for an increase in price. I was out today and there appeared to be just as many vehicles out and about as ever. Guys with huge black trucks guzzling diesel, which here in Calif. is 470-490 a gallon. Guess people have no end of funds at these prices for the energetic liquid.
Although it might be up to $127~ its probably safe to say that $17 of that is pure market speculation. How far that trends I can't really say but I imagine it will pull back to $110 - $115 when the market gets the news it wants to hear.
Oh you know and can quantify exactly how much is speculation? Do pray tell your scientific method for this assessment, sir.
I would love an explanation of how speculators run up the forward month contract. Before the end of the month they would have to sell the contract or take delivery. Without a way to store it I don't see how the speculators drive the price as the month ends. I see how there could be a bubble in something permanent like real estate or stocks or storeable like silver but the key feature of futures contracts is that they expire and both parties have to sell out of their positions or go ahead with physical delivery.
we have a post around here on how the futures markets work, and Jeff Vail has a post coming next week on backwardation.
The term "speculator" is probably too broad when used by the media - they should use "investor" instead. A lot of investment banks like Morgan Stanley are big players in the physical oil market (they own Transmontaigne). They are the real speculators when they take physical delivery and then store it in the hopes of selling it at a higher price in the future.
Exactly - speculator driven price increases have to be accompanied by increased holdings of the physical goods associated with the contract. Stocks are not building significantly QED no speculative bubble.
I'm stunned that so many OD'ers are buying the spin being put out by CERA and OPEC that speculators are driving this price run up. Normally around here we're a bit more skeptical than that. But because this line is 'easy' and 'convienient' it's been picked widely by the media and other commentators.
Hi Jaymax,
Have you a source for your statement: Stocks are not building significantly. Thanks.
From Paul Krugman in the NY Times
I understand that is not a primary source, so take it for what it is worth. I think, however, that a lot of people are putting too much emphasis on what is essentially noise in the US inventory numbers or (worse) reading US gasoline inventories as proxies for oil inventories.
Edit: On a personal note, I made a trip last fall to visit my parents in FL. We took peak oil videos and literature with us and spent the week talking about the coming rise in oil prices. They are Fox News Republicans, and I wanted to get to them before Fox propaganda turned to peak oil.
Well, they came to visit us this week. Instead of "Gee! You sure were right about oil prices!," my father last night said, "It is all speculation. If they reign in speculation, the price of oil will be cut in half." *sigh* I think my mother gets it, but I'm afraid my father is lost to iron triangle propaganda.
I can't understand why so many people don't "get" supply & demand. Unless you can affect either supply or demand, you're not going to have a significant effect on prices. Unless there is hoarding, speculators have no effect on supply, and the only effect they have on demand is opposite to the direction of their speculation.
Thanks shargash,
That NY times article may not be primary but it sounds as if they are reading from primary sources ... maybe:)
(Actually though my question to Jaymax and a similar question to yartrebo (below)sprang more from amusement that the two diametrically opposed views came so close together on the thread without blows being struck).
Here's a link to the EIA web page where each week they report the stocks of crude oil being stored at major facilities. You'll notice there's not an excessive amount for this time of year. I suppose there could be some stocks that aren't being accounted for, but you'd have to find them.
Well the largest inventory is probably floating around or in transit in tankers. It is possible to change where ships go and how long it takes to get there to manipulate prices. Here's an interesting article.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aQZcc1kgLb8k&refer=home
By the way, I'm with Smith(above) all the way to $140. Woohoo! What a rush.
At least we get to fight al'Cia in Iraq, now that they finally got a foothold. Hopefully, McSame will steer us on a clear path to victory, or something.
I'm working on a chart that shows the history of actual storage of oil in the U.S. and it's relation to oil price. It sheds some light on this "speculation" thing. Rising inventories are billed as meaning nobody wants any oil and any price increase is pure speculation . But history shows that oil storage goes up when there's a shortage and everyone wants it. This happened big time in the 70s. It is hardly happening at all now when we have the mother of all shortages setting in. The difference between price run up and storage patterns between the 70s, the Gulf War, and now is ridiculous.
I too am baffled to understand how futures traders could significantly alter the market price of a commodity -- aside from moving it around in some kind of range based on fundamentals of supply and demand.
That's why I've been thinking there must be some actual physical hoarding going on now. Increasing inventory of this raw material seems very logical for a company whose business depends on having absolutely reliable sources of petroleum products, including companies who use petroleum products as feedstocks for plastics and chemicals.
Storing some spare quantity of the stuff is exactly what I would do if I were in that position, and was starting to worry about supply interruptions.
If there is in fact hoarding going on, I don't think it is being done for the purpose of turning a profit. It is usually only possible to profit from commodity price changes by trading contracts rather than the physical material. That's because the net profit for buying actual product low and selling it high would likely be quite small compared with the expense of doing so. Consider that one would have to acquire (or more likely, build) storage facilities, ship the product to the storage location, and then staff and maintain and protect that location, and finally ship the product on to its ultimate purchaser. In the face of such expenses, even a comparatively large increase in price would not be enough to gain much direct monetary profit from physical storage.
In summary, I think we are seeing some panic buying and hoarding, not for speculative profit but rather in pursuit of supply security. With the world market for oil as tight as it is now, even a very small increment of geographically widespread hoarding might move prices sharply higher.
Of course if supply later loosens up, such hoarding would contribute to increased volatility on the down side, too, since companies might then draw down their stored supplies for a while, rather than buying new product.
Or we are simply seeing importers bidding for declining net oil exports.