<A Few Thoughts on US Petroleum Demand, Inventories, and Prices The Oil Drum New Taxes for Oil and Gas Companies: Where Does this Lead Us?>
<DrumBeat: February 26, 2009 DrumBeat DrumBeat: February 28, 2009>

215 comments on DrumBeat: February 27, 2009

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version

Nowhere on February 27, 2009 - 10:07am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

"Shell Oil Company President Marvin Odum tells Steve Inskeep that he expects demand throughout the world to double by 2050."

How can you double the demand when only half the supply will exist?
Not possible........

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
darwinsdog on February 27, 2009 - 10:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I heard that interview. Inskeep asked direct questions & Odum dodged them. Liars on behalf of special interests in conflict with the interests of the people & of the biosphere - like Odum - need to be in prison.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JonFreise on February 27, 2009 - 12:07pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

As CEO he is trapped into not telling the truth. If he does, stocks drop and he is liable. That does not make it right, but a journalist would be a fool to ask a man a question when you know he is going to lie.

We had the API up here to talk on public radio and tell us if peak oil was real or not. I guess we should be asking the cattleman's association if red meat has cholesterol....

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sgage on February 27, 2009 - 12:13pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

And so we simply accept an economy and a society built on lies. Make the f**ker lie, and call him out!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
souperman2 on February 27, 2009 - 1:14pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

"As CEO he is trapped into not telling the truth."

This statement is key.

This is epidemic in the corporate realm, and political too for that matter (NEWS FLASH)

So with all the top people, the best and the brightest lying their a$$es off how can we expect anybody to do the right thing.

This tragedy is about a tiny .001% of the population lying and manipulating the vast majority, not simply explained and summarily dismissed by saying “oh that’s just how homowhareverus is. It’s in the genes. We can’t help it...”. BS

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
710 on February 27, 2009 - 3:18pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The flawed rules we used to build our civilized juggernaut of growth will accelerate the collapse.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Fubard on February 27, 2009 - 7:41pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

a journalist would be a fool to ask a man a question when you know he is going to lie

I think that's precisely when it's most important for a journalist to ask such questions.

The best journalists are also reasonably well prepared for what that lie is likely to be, and have follow-up questions ready and aimed for when the liar tries to BS the question.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
aangel on February 27, 2009 - 7:47pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

British journalists seem to be very good at this. American ones not so much.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
souperman2 on February 27, 2009 - 9:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

"...follow-up questions ready and aimed for when the liar tries to BS the question."

or a shoe

BTW that guy has my vote for Nobel Prize

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jokuhl on February 27, 2009 - 12:39pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

RE:Prison
I thought the exact same thing, DD. Actually, a little worse.

I was pleading for Santa to give me an advance on Christmas for next year and have Inskeep somehow accidentally ask Odum just what the US production and discovery curves have looked like for the last 40 years.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
PaulS on February 27, 2009 - 12:19pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

"How can you double the demand when only half the supply will exist?"

Ummm...ding, ding, ding...by having the price go up until the quantities supplied and consumed roughly match up? (Or maybe also by 'rationing', i.e. the government puts a gun to the head of everyone not politically well-connected and orders them to go jump off the island?)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Darwinian on February 27, 2009 - 12:40pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Paul, you don't understand the question and your answer is simply worng. Demand is simply another term for "Petroleum Products Supplied". The EIA uses both terms interchangably. If demand doubles that means that supply doubles as well. Demand must always equal supply with price the arbitrator. That is price will cause the two to meet at some point.

When Shell Oil Company President Marvin Odum said demand would double he also meant supply would double.

Ron

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
r4ndom on February 27, 2009 - 12:55pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

But how do you measure it?

If you measure by money transferred rather than by volume, then demand can easily double while the total volume supplied goes down. Most lies of this nature operate on the unexamined assumption.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Darwinian on February 27, 2009 - 1:12pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

They measure it in millions of barrels per day and definitely not money transferred. There are no unexamined assumptions in this case.

And Consumer, the EIA referrs to demand as being basically the same thing as consumption, or more accurately, petroleum products supplyed. That is demand is what you get when you are willing to pay the price. In the real world that is not the case. A child may demand candy but will not necessarly get it.

Ron

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
r4ndom on February 27, 2009 - 1:43pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Whom is this "they" to which you refer?

I would expect the CEO of a corporation asked to evaluate the demand for their product on the spot to use whatever measure they thought was most favorable, whether it's gallons, dollars, or magical pixie fairy dust units.

Just because it is "Industry Standard" doesn't mean it is the only possible measure, and the easiest way to lie about any sort of flows is to change the way you are measuring them to something non-standard and not say that you are doing so.

"Demand" for petroleum can be measured in dollars or gallons, the equation balances the same either way. It is dishonest to measure it in dollars when you are asked about volume availability, but that has never stopped anyone before. It is equally dishonest to talk in terms of physical units shifted when asked about sales flows for profitability of the company, but that never slowed anybody down, either. What we lose per unit we make up for in volume!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Darwinian on February 27, 2009 - 2:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Whom is this "they" to which you refer?

The EIA, the IEA, OPEC and virtually every other oil reporting agency around the world. Except of course those who use metric tons as their measurement. Then the numbers are converted to barrels by the EIA and the IEA.

When WT, or anyone else on this list talks about net oil exports, they are talking about oil, not dollars. When we talk about oil production falling or rising, we are talking about oil, not dollars. When we talk about oil consumption we are talking about oil not dollars.

Of course there are other ways of measuring but the when Shell executive was talking about demand for oil doubling by 2050 he was talking about oil as measured in quantities oil, not dollars. That should have been down in the dirt obvious to anyone so why are you being so silly?

Ron

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
r4ndom on February 27, 2009 - 2:21pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

You missed my point completely.

To expect that the CEO of an Oil Company who deals with $SALES volume demand as well as physical volume demand for his product will not use whichever measure he thinks puts his company in the best light when speaking in a public forum where he does not expect to be challenged on whatever assertion he chooses to make is an invalid assumption.

What measure CERA, IEA, EIA, and everyone else uses is irrelevant to what he said and that is how what he said can be a lie and the "truth" at the same time, thus saving his fat from any immediate fire.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Darwinian on February 27, 2009 - 2:44pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I wrote: "When Shell Oil Company President Marvin Odum said demand would double he also meant supply would double."

You replied with a question: "But how do you measure it?"

They measure it in quantities of oil! Barrels, tons or whatever, they measure it in quantities of oil. That should have been blatantly obvious to everyone. They (the EIA, IEA, OPEC, or whomever), do not measure demand of oil in dollars. When the EIA publishes data on demand, they publish it in barrels per day. The debate about oil doubling by 2050 was all about oil, not dollars.

End of story. Gotta go now. I am meeting another list member for lunch. First time I have ever met one face to face in the three years three months I have been on this list.

Ron

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Consumer on February 27, 2009 - 12:57pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Two economists are walking down the street, when they pass a Porsche dealer. One sees the brand new Porsche 911 in the window and says "Wow that's beautiful, I really want that car". "Well, obviously, you don't" says the other.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sgage on February 27, 2009 - 1:18pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Three statisticians were out hunting, when they spotted a magnificent buck. The first one took his shot, but it was clearly a couple of feet low, in the dirt. The second fired off a round, but it was clearly a couple of feet high, clipping a tree branch.

The third one shouted... "we got him!"

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
darwinsdog on February 27, 2009 - 2:04pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

It's an established fact that >100% of the population hate, mistrust, and don't understand statistics! ;)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
710 on February 27, 2009 - 3:21pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

In a complex world, the same can be said about government, politcal parties, technology, religions, and the opposite sex.

Complexity is the problem.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
NZSanctuary on February 28, 2009 - 1:00am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

One of the reasons people generally have trouble understanding this (the main one, IMO) is because of our social psyche - with its emphasis on thinking of the universe as being made of separate bits. It misses half the picture...

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
estamos jodidos on February 27, 2009 - 5:11pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

There are 10 types of people. Those who read binary and those who don't...

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
NZSanctuary on February 28, 2009 - 12:31am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

That's good :)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on February 28, 2009 - 9:21am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

three guys(maybe statistician) were out hunting: in the morning they went outside to strech their legs and there was a hugh buck standing there, they each took a few quick shots and went inside to get their guns.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

215 comments on DrumBeat: February 27, 2009

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version