<Senate blocks debate of clean energy tax credits The Oil Drum DrumBeat: June 18, 2008>

177 comments on Peak Oil Media: Simmons Says Raised Saudi Oil Output Is 'Drop in Bucket' on Bloomberg

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Rethin on June 18, 2008 - 12:00am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

God, I think you actually got dumber in your absence.

Only an ill-informed person would suggest that a drop in oil consumption in a country that produces oil would not increase global oil exports!

China is a net importer. They do produce oil, but use a lot more than they produce, hence net importer.

If China imports less, it does not increase the amount other nations export. How in the world could it?

It might free up some of those exports for other countries, but that's not what you wrote.

Net exports depend entirely on countries that export oil.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
wunsacon on June 18, 2008 - 12:17am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Since oil is fungible and you figured out what he meant, it seems you're agreeing with each other.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Rethin on June 18, 2008 - 12:33am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I'm not agreeing with him, I'm correcting him

Note how this got started

Global exports are unlikely to increase in the future. Do you agree or disagree?

Disagree.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
r4ndom on June 18, 2008 - 8:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Oh, oil exports probably will increase at some point in the future.

It will be a relative increase and a temporary one, but it is almost a certainty that it will happen sometime.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Weaseldog on June 18, 2008 - 11:33am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

It's almost a certainty, but not an actual certainty.

It is a certainty that export levels will drop over time, without recovering.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
BrandonfromEastTexas on June 18, 2008 - 3:02am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I will do my best to explain this to you in a rational, logical method that even you can follow. As we call agree, oil is a fungible product.

Lets look at a facsimile of real world oil production:

Global oil production 86 million barrels per day.
Global oil exports are 38 million barrels per day.

Lets look at the hypothetical country X.

Country X produces 3 million barrels of oil internally.
Country X consumes 2 million barrels per day.
Country X exports 1 million barrels per day.

Following me so far?

Country X subsidizes fuel prices, making them one half the global average.
Country X ends subsidies and its citizens must then pay the world price.
Country X citizens cut back on consumption, and now only use 1.5 million barrels per day.
Country X now exports 1.5 million barrels per day.

Still with me? What does this do to our global oil picture?

Global oil production 86 million barrels per day.
Global oil exports are 38.5 million barrels per day.

That gives us 500,000 barrels per day 'extra' oil on the world market in the form of exports. If that isn't an example of the ELM in reverse, I do not know what is.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Kiashu on June 18, 2008 - 3:23am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

And when some oil-exporting country actually does cut subsidies, let us know.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Rethin on June 18, 2008 - 4:33am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

You said China could increase net exports.

Remember, China produces oil too! The greater the percentage of oil their domestic production satisfies, the more 'oil' that is added to the global economy. Only an ill-informed person would suggest that a drop in oil consumption in a country that produces oil would not increase global oil exports!

But now its "Country X".

Can't you just admit you were wrong?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
bigpatty on June 18, 2008 - 9:32am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

this is barely related to your original point, your argument was that China (net importer) could increase world exports by decreasing consumption.

Your argument above is about an net exporting country cutting consumption, that's not happening, Most of the large exporters have subsidies still (and are very unlikely to stop them, it would be silly to).

Even if what you said were true, it's not even applicable to this argument...nice try though...

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

177 comments on Peak Oil Media: Simmons Says Raised Saudi Oil Output Is 'Drop in Bucket' on Bloomberg

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version