200 plus oil

[diggy70]

Im going say 200 us dollar oil in the next 12 months(diggy's prediction). I say this based that the world's top 4 oil field's in delcline.
they are: Garwar the biggest <water injection> sign of oil peak

....the other 3 north sea, north slop, and cantrell.
these 4 oil fields produced 18 million+ barrels a day at one time.. now less that 11 million???hmmmm
demand for oil is moving higher , where is all the oil decoveries???????
hope you all have some plan for this on a personal level!!!!!
want diggy's plan get out of debt. And buy oil in thestock market for the long term.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I hope you're right.

 

[Just thinking]

... demand for oil is moving higher , where is all the oil decoveries???????

Brazil? Or better still, perhaps right in our own (USA) backyard?

... hope you all have some plan for this on a personal level!!!!!

And just what might that be? ... on a global scale? Many folks right now are starving or finding food prices/transportation too high. On an individual scale we cannot use alternate sources for energy as the technology isn't there for us.

want diggy's plan get out of debt. And buy oil in thestock market for the long term.

It's hard to get out of debt when your expenses are rising faster than inflation. It's even harder to find capital to invest with.

 

[Dymanic]

Oil discovery peaked in the 1960s. Enthusiastic announcements of discoveries of non-conventional sources should serve to increase the level of concern, not reduce it, because nobody in the oil business is going to get excited about that sort of thing as long as conventional sources remain plentiful.

Though I too am not quite sure what the average person's plan for dealing with the consequences would look like, if it is true that Gawar has peaked, then we're all in a lot of trouble. It's a message important enough to warrant at least a minimal effort to make proper use of capital letters, spacing, and punctuation when presenting it.

The Saudis treat information regarding the extent of the remaining reserves as a national secret, but a considerable amount of effort on the part of some very clever people is dedicated to accurately estimating this. One thing they look at is the extent to which water injection is being used to maintain well pressures, but the practice has been in use for a long time, so it's really not definitive by itself.

 

[rjh01]

I think $200 barrel oil within the next year is a safe bet. I have made that prediction elsewhere on this forum.

Actually I think it is a good thing because about the only things that can stop it are a downturn in USA, China or Japan.

 

[diggy70]

Oil discovery
The Saudis treat information regarding the extent of the remaining reserves as a national secret, but a considerable amount of effort on the part of some very clever people is dedicated to accurately estimating this. One thing they look at is the extent to which water injection is being used to maintain well pressures, but the practice has been in use for a long time, so it's really not definitive by itself.

You must admit Water injection in to an oil field is not a good sign.

People are going to have to take a good hard on how they are living.
Energy is going to go higher and this will hurt us all. 130 oil is going to start with wiping out airlines then move its way down the energy food chain. And With these 4 oil fields peaking oil is still cheep at 130. If the public gets on the oil band wagon, now thats a scary thought.. 300 to 400 dollar oil in just months.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

People are going to have to take a good hard on how they are living.

I'm not. Nor do I plan to.

 

[Dymanic]

You must admit Water injection in to an oil field is not a good sign.

By itself, no. Not really. Significant increases in the extent to which this practice is being implemented would be another matter. I don't know if Gawar has peaked or not. Even those who know the exact output numbers would have a hard time making the call, and that even in the face of a clear decline, because it's something that can be influenced by a number of factors besides the size of the remaining reserves. Hubbert predicted that US domestic production would peak in 1970, and from this vantage point in time it is very obvious that it did exactly that; but a month or two after that peak, or even a year or two after, it might have been possible to view it as a temporary trend. The nature of peaks is that they are hard to see until some time after they have happened.

People are going to have to take a good hard on how they are living.

Yes. A great many will wait until the last possible moment to do this, but that's just the way people are. Announce that a major hurricane is headed toward a low-lying city, and there will be significant numbers of people who will not only wait until the last possible moment to evacuate, there will even be some who will stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that a threat exists at all. A few days later, those hard cases will be standing on rooftops waving their arms at the news helicopters (but by that point, yes, they will be taking a good hard look at how they're living).

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Yes. A great many will wait until the last possible moment to do this, but that's just the way people are. Announce that a major hurricane is headed toward a low-lying city, and there will be significant numbers of people who will not only wait until the last possible moment to evacuate, there will even be some who will stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that a threat exists at all. A few days later, those hard cases will be standing on rooftops waving their arms at the news helicopters (but by that point, yes, they will be taking a good hard look at how they're living).

What "last possible moment"? People act like the world oil supply will suddenly run out one day. It ain't gonna happen. It will never run completely out. We will still be pumping oil 100 years from now.

 

[Dymanic]

What "last possible moment"? People act like the world oil supply will suddenly run out one day.

I agree that most people's understanding of the peak oil threat is so lacking that they take this mistaken position. Due to the nature of oil drilling, the peak production point for any source tends to be at about the point when roughly half of the oil has been extracted. But once you're past that point of peak production, then by definition, you will never produce that much again, no matter what you do. It's not so much about the amount of oil that's left as it is about the rate at which that oil can be extracted. The consequences are primarily economic.

The "last possible moment" will be different for each person. You might call it the point just before all of the remaining options become dead-ends; if your job ceases to exist in the face of skyrocketing energy costs, or you can no longer afford to commute to work, and you can't change jobs, or move, because you can't aquire the resources you'd need to do that; if every vehicle in your driveway takes two thirds of your paycheck to fill with gasoline, and a trip to the grocery store would cost the same, then you have about as many options as did those people in the photos from NOLA, the ones with the big hand-lettered signs reading "HELP US".

If you happen to be among the few so privileged that doubling or even tripling fuel costs wouldn't put much of a ding in your budget, then hey... party on.

 

[Francesca R]

I think $200 barrel oil within the next year is a safe bet. I have made that prediction elsewhere on this forum.

Congratulations, but it's a punt not a "safe bet".

Actually I think it is a good thing because about the only things that can stop it are a downturn in USA, China or Japan.

And . . . investors selling oil futures because they don't want so many of them any more.

130 oil is going to start with wiping out airlines

Sensationalism, not critical thinking.

If the public gets on the oil band wagon, now thats a scary thought.. 300 to 400 dollar oil in just months.

Congratulations, another punt.

 

[Gurdur]

... Sensationalism, not critical thinking.

No, actually. Not at all. These days, in the era of privatisation and dereglation, Western airlines are often teetring on economic catastrophe anyway. I do assume you have been following the news about airlines in the USA, and Air Italia, just for examples, over the past 2 months?

When oil climbs to a significantly higher price, it does indeed add a significant burden to many airlines (albeit not all), and is another factor in the clump of factors affecting airlines badly at this time.

 

[Francesca R]

I agree that most people's understanding of the peak oil threat is so lacking that they take this mistaken position. Due to the nature of oil drilling, the peak production point for any source tends to be at about the point when roughly half of the oil has been extracted. But once you're past that point of peak production, then by definition, you will never produce that much again, no matter what you do. It's not so much about the amount of oil that's left as it is about the rate at which that oil can be extracted. The consequences are primarily economic.

Er. there is no shortage of oil today. In 1973 there was an oil embargo by OAPEC and the world lost an eighth of its crude supply overnight. There is no such thing this time.

Some people think that it is actually global expansion that is driving oil up, not that oil going up will kill the global economy.

I think it will damage developed economies' growth but nothing like as much as the sensationalist claims I have seem some places.

 

[Gurdur]

Er. there is no shortage of oil today.

.....Some people think that it is actually global expansion that is driving oil up, not that oil going up will kill the global economy.

Francesca, there is a reply of mine to you just above the post of yours which I now quote and also reply to.

Pardon me, but I think you are contradicting yourself here. Demand is driving the price of oil up, and supply is not making up for the increased demand. Relatively speaking, and relative to only 2 short years ago, there is indeed a shortage of oil -- which is why oil has climbed from $25 a barrel to $130 a barrel in quite a very short time.

 

[Francesca R]

No, actually. Not at all. These days, in the era of privatisation and dereglation, Western airlines are often teetring on economic catastrophe anyway. I do assume you have been following the news about airlines in the USA, and Air Italia, just for examples, over the past 2 months?

Like Delta/Northwest? I don't consider a merger to be a wiping out at all. More the result of competition, finally.

And despite privatisation and deregulation, aviation is one of the most protected industries from genuine competition. That is why so many carriers are unfit IMO. Not fuel costs.

When oil climbs to a significantly higher price, it does indeed add a significant burden to many airlines (albeit not all), and is another factor in the clump of factors affecting airlines badly at this time.

Yes. A much more measured statement.

 

[Nogbad]

I think we need to have a measure of calm here. Oil is $130 a barrel and the price at the pumps is hurting. We are paying $8.35 a US gallon and I don't smile when I fill the tank.

However, it is not the end of civilisation as we know it. It is a pain though and recessions are made on the back of this sort of thing. Recessions colour our political perspective and we associate politicians and eras with tightening belts and foreclosures. Is this to be GW's legacy rather than far flung wars of dubious merit?

 

[Francesca R]

Recessions hurt because we are used to economic output expanding faster than population, which means that living standards rise on a sustained trend. And that seems to have been true since the 18th century industrial revolution (in Britain anyway). Prophecies of doom ever since have been false ones, starting with Thomas Malthus.

 

[Dymanic]

I think it will damage developed economies' growth but nothing like as much as the sensationalist claims I have seem some places.

I can't think of a single threat that is not subject to being sensationalized, regardless of how valid the concerns over it may be. Somewhere between chicken little and the ostrich, there must surely be something like an appropriate and rational response, whatever the threat. If it involves the challenging of some deeply entrenched notions, well, we've seen that before.

Ultimately, the concept "growth" does not merely mean taking natural resources and using them to create wealth; indigenous peoples the world over did this for millennia, and some of them remained relatively stable for long periods of time. No, it means doing that at an ever increasing rate.

Initially, the resource is plentiful, so increasing the rate of harvest is just a matter of how many boats and nets are available to haul in the fish, or how many saws and railcars are available to get the logs to the mills, or how many gold pans and rockers are available to separate the gold from the gravel. But as more of these tools are introduced, a point of diminishing returns is reached where it starts getting more expensive to maintain the same rate of increase in the rate at which the resource is being harvested. This represents a fundamental limit to the economic growth that is possible from that activity. You can pay the price for the continued increase, but as the price increases, you gain less and less by doing that.

Eventually, you encounter another limit: the point at which the resource begins to decline. If the resource was a renewable one like timber, then as long as you were harvesting it at a rate below that at which it recovered, everything was jake, and you could have kept doing that forever. If the resource was a non-renewable one like gold, or oil, then it was in decline from day one, so it was really just a matter of how long you'd be able to enjoy the glory days when what you were basically doing was skimming the cream.

If you didn't realize that that's what you were doing, and if you planned the rest of your life on the assumption that things were just going to keep getting better and better, then by ignoring the inevitability of an encounter with the point where your returns would begin to diminish, you were setting yourself up for a very rude shock. The way I see it, this is essentially what we have done. We're not yet at the point where it's even a problem with economics, or with resources. It's a thinking problem.

 

[Dymanic]

We are paying $8.35 a US gallon and I don't smile when I fill the tank.

Out of curiosity, just how big is that tank, and how often do you fill it? My casual observation is that where I live (Northern California), something like a third of the passenger vehicles on the road are trucks or SUVs. This suggests that a "measure of calm" has not been seriously lacking for some time, though the owners of those vehicles are increasingly making efforts to unload them in favor of something more fuel efficient (and finding the trade-in values to be far less than what they expected). Most of these vehicles have a fuel tank with a capacity of about 25 US gallons (I'm guessing), which, at that price, would take more than $200 US to fill. I'm also guessing that the average person around here probably fills up about twice a week. Would you say that that is comparable to how things are where you live? I looked at some statistics, and it looks like maybe seven percent of the people in LA use public transportation, and in some US cities, it's well below one percent. They're saying that in Edinburgh, it's just under thirty percent. Does that sound about right to you?

However, it is not the end of civilisation as we know it.

Here again, I think that's going to vary a lot from one individual to another, and from one place to another, depending on just what "as we know it" means to that person, in that place.

 

[diggy70]

And . . . investors selling oil futures because they don't want so many of them any more.

Sensationalism, not critical thinking.

UR kidding me , what kind of critical thinker are you??? you seem to be very closed minded to make coments like that. Do some research on oil.

They can sell oil futures all day at $130 and people are buying them.. cause if people where not buy they would go down.

As for the airlines, they hedge fuel 6 months in advance.
Here's the thing they will have to raise prices huge in a few months and they will go under because people can pay more at least in the FOMC.