The net export decline rate can be thought of as a function of 4 variables: 1)world demand for oil, 2)geologic depletion, 3)internal demand for oil from exporting nations (which could further be broken down between energy and non-energy sectors) and 4)decline rate differential between exporters and non-exporters. The 'relentless decline' in net exports, in 2009, will predominantly be due to a drop in oil demand, not the other 3 factors.

If the average price for both 2009 and 2010 is lower than avg for 2008, what would that change about your outlook? Because there is a subtle snag in your theory - if oil prices plummet (which they have), those countries whose economies are predominantly based on oil export, demand will drop MORE due to wealth effect, then the ROW which has more balanced economies (already, most oil exporters will run fiscal deficits at these prices.)

It's still too early for this to manifest in lower domestic prod #s- we shall see. (and in any case, the low cost production is virtually all located in export land, so lower prices 'hurt' them less than the producers of expensive oil - see below CERA/Horizon graph). In sum, the equation boils down to lower wealth effect on oil concentrated economies + greater reduction in expensive projects in oil importing countries. We shall see which dominates in 2009...

(If we do go into a full-on depression, oil exports are going to drop precipitously)

IMO, the following top 10 exporters are probably in long term terminal net export decline (relative to the 2005 to 2007 levels): Saudi Arabia, Russia, Norway, Iran, Venezuela and Mexico (probably also Kuwait & Nigeria).

But the key metric to consider is the net export rate versus the net export depletion rate (depletion marches on regardless of whether production and exports are increasing or decreasing, in fact, higher net exports cause the net export depletion rate to increase).

Our middle case is that the top five net oil exporters--accounting for about half of world net oil exports--have already shipped about one fifth of their post-2005 cumulative net oil exports. One fifth gone, in a little more than a thousand days.

As of January 1, 2009, assuming a current net export rate of 20 mbpd from the top five, our middle case is that they are depleting their post-2008 net cumulative net exports at the rate of about one percent every 50 days. (About 100 GB left, shipping about one Gb every 50 days). For comparison purposes, Indonesia shipped about one percent of their post-1996 cumulative net oil exports about every 18 days from 1997 to 2000, inclusive.

IMO, the net export decline rate--which in 2009 will be a combination of voluntary + involuntary export reductions--will cause the decline in net oil exports to outpace the decline in demand in 2009, pushing oil prices back up.

How would a sharp drop in demand change your numbers?

It helps to keep historical analogues in perspective.

Just eyeballing a Thirties production chart, it appears that world oil consumption only fell in one year, in 1930. As "Downsouth" noted, there were three million more cars on the road in 1937 in the US than in 1929. The key difference regarding auto demand between now and 1929 is that hundreds of millions of people worldwide want to drive a car for the first time now versus millions of people in the 1929.

In the early Eighties, we obviously saw a decline in demand, but the price decline was very gradual (price decline of -6%/year from 1981 to 1985), as Saudi Arabia cut back on exports. The big price decline did not occur until Saudi Arabia boosted their production and exports in 1986 (price decline of -73%/year from 1985 to 1986):

And it remains to be seen if the 2009 average annual oil price will be below the 2008 average price.

I like to use the inflation adjusted oil price shown here:

http://www.wtrg.com/prices.htm

Of course it is a wee bit of problem trying to buy and sell in terms of inflation adjusted dollars. Commerce is done with nominal dollars.

But it's the only way that a graph that includes almost 100 years of price data can be even a little bit relevant.

Quite complicated.

1 Ignoring the economy, there is one demand at 98/b (1/1/08), less demand at 50% higher (147/b 7/08) and more demand down 50% (46/b on 1/2/09). With the economy down and employment falling, there is clearly less demand at each of the above price points than when the economy was at a higher level. US demand could be increasing already on account of lower price - too early to tell. Also, lower price is helping the economy, no doubt this helped retail sales, down a little y/y this xmas season but not as bad as some feared.

2. Saudi is well aware that their own increased output had a lot to do with the price crash, higher supplies coming just as demand was falling on account of high price and a slowing economy. (this increase surprised many at tod, including me, that were expecting permanent declines from the kingdom.)

3. Reducing the supply, as opec is doing, will raise price and further reduce demand. Saudi supposedly wants 75/b... there are growing reports that other members will meet the latest reduced targets. IMO opec is back in the saddle for now, and that price will rebound as time progresses and the cuts take hold. I see now as the ideal time to invest in small us e&p's.

Small US E&Ps? With the above data by CERA showing average barrel to produce in North America is between $60-$80 cost? You better pick the right ones...