Peak Oil is You

Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)

Page added on December 26, 2014

Bookmark and Share

Oil and Gas Prices Are Manipulated Once Again


OPEC will not cut output even at $20 a barrel … OPEC will not cut oil production even if the price drops to $20 a barrel and it is unfair to expect the cartel to reduce output if non-members do not, Saudi Arabia said. “Whether it goes down to $20 a barrel, $40, $50, $60, it is irrelevant,” the kingdom’s Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi said in an interview with the Middle East Economic Survey (MEES), an industry weekly. In unusually detailed comments, Naimi defended a decision by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, whose lead producer is Saudi Arabia, last month to maintain a production ceiling of 30 million barrels per day. – Daily Mail

Dominant Social Theme: Nothing that is happening to oil is surprising.

Free-Market Analysis: For years we had arguments with “peak oilers” who maintained that the world was running out of oil.

Of course, they always objected to this simplified version of their arguments. Peak oilers liked to clothe their arguments in intricate statistics. The only people who use more obscure rhetoric than peak oilers are global warmists.

Thankfully, peak oiler rhetoric and warmist rhetoric don’t seem to be quite so common or obnoxious as they used to be. This is rough justice. Nothing much that the warmists have predicted has come true, and peak oilers face a similar situation.

We remember, for instance, that snow was to have melted off the Alps by now. And Saudi Arabia was running out of oil …

Of course, oil is a most powerful energy source and subject to numerous political and economic influences – and also manipulated scarcities at regular intervals. We’re fairly sure, in fact, that the price will go back up again, if only because some other modern sources of oil will shut down.

But not now. Not yet …

Here’s how Wikipedia describes the peak oil theory:

Peak oil, an event based on M. King Hubbert’s theory, is the point in time when the maximum rate of extraction of petroleum is reached, after which the rate of production is expected to enter terminal decline.

Peak oil theory is based on the observed rise, peak, (sometimes rapid) fall, and depletion of aggregate production rate in oil fields over time. Mostly due to the development of new production techniques and the exploitation of unconventional supplies, Hubbert’s original predictions for world production proved premature.

Peak oil is often confused with oil depletion; peak oil is the point of maximum production, while depletion refers to a period of falling reserves and supply.

Notice how Wikipedia slips in the explanation of why Hubbert’s theories proved “premature.” The relevant phrase is, “Mostly due to the development of new production techniques and the exploitation of unconventional supplies …”

Ain’t that the truth! … A free-market argument boiled down to the essentials. It is always the market with “new production techniques” and “unconventional supplies” that confounds predictions of scarcity.

In this case, Hubbert’s predictions of gloom and doom were no doubt exacerbated by his own determination to see his 1930s technocratic movement flourish. Hubbert believed that only qualified people could run the world – technocrats with superior knowledge about a given field.

Peak oil was Hubbert’s contribution. Since Hubbert and a handful of other Platonists were smarter than the rest of us, they could see farther as well. Hubbert provided some of the most far-seeing predictions of all, or so he advertised, with his peak oil perceptions.

But now – at least for the moment – everything has changed. Oil has asserted its fundamental nature as one of capitalism‘s most disingenuous commodities.

Here’s more:

OPEC said it would not cut oil production even if the price drops to $20 a barrel, a decision that has sent global crude prices tumbling

The decision sent global crude prices tumbling, worsening a price drop that has seen them fall by around 50 percent since June. Slower demand growth and a stronger dollar have also contributed to the slump. Saudi Arabia has traditionally acted to balance demand and supply in the global oil market because it is the only country with substantial spare production capacity, according to the International Monetary Fund.

The kingdom pumps about 9.6 million barrels per day but Naimi said it is “crooked logic” to expect his country to cut and then lose business to other major producers outside OPEC. The increasingly competitive global oil market has seen daily United States output rise by more than 40 percent since 2006, but at a production cost which can be three or four times that of extracting Middle Eastern oil.

“Is it reasonable for a highly efficient producer to reduce output, while the producer of poor efficiency continues to produce?” Naimi asked during the interview conducted with MEES on Sunday. “If I reduce, what happens to my market share? The price will go up and the Russians, the Brazilians, US shale oil producers will take my share.”

This last graf sums up the kind of market arguments we have made in the past. The invisible hand of competition is one of the organizers of the oil market, as it is of any market. To believe that the Saudis were just going to sit idly by while their market share of the world’s oil eroded was probably a naïve assumption.

But there is another issue admittedly that free markets have to struggle with – and that’s the apparently massive scale of market manipulation when it comes to commodities and other important 21st century goods and services.

For instance, the US apparently wants to take down the Russian economy and has put pressure on the Saudis to lower oil prices, which hurt a foundational element of the Russian economy.

The Saudis themselves are probably content to lower prices because it damages the market for oil fracking, which has shown – as we predicted in the past – that oil is available pretty much anywhere.

The Saud family and US strategists have similar interests regarding oil currently. In the longer term, however, interests will decouple once again. This could produce far higher oil prices, as Naimi seems to suggest in the article.

When it comes to the oil business, nothing much is what it seems – and there are almost always other potential considerations. In the long term, we figure oil and gas prices will move back up, if only because the West needs such supplies. Europe especially is dependent on Russian oil.

Conclusion: Oil, in other words, will continue to be a key ingredient of modern society … at an array of prices. But there will continue to be plenty of intrigue regarding its availability and supply.

the daily bell

36 Comments on "Oil and Gas Prices Are Manipulated Once Again"

  1. Perk Earl on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 12:09 pm 

    “For years we had arguments with “peak oilers” who maintained that the world was running out of oil.”

    That’s wrong. I’ve never read any posts from other ‘peak oilers’ about running out.

    “Nothing that is happening to oil is surprising.”

    That’s wrong too. There has been plenty of surprise about it’s sudden 40% price descent.

    “We remember, for instance, that snow was to have melted off the Alps by now. And Saudi Arabia was running out of oil”

    That’s wrong as far as I understand both AGW and peak oil. I have read no predictions that all the snow was to have melted off the Alps by this date, and although Simmons wrote ‘Twilight in the Desert’, it was his personal assessment that oil in SA would descend from a peak, not run out.

    “OPEC said it would not cut oil production even if the price drops to $20 a barrel, a decision that has sent global crude prices tumbling”

    That’s false too. The recent plunge in oil price was not started by the above comment by OPEC. Price just simply started dropping, then much later the 20 dollar comment was made, to indicate they were not giving up market share by reducing production.

    “But now – at least for the moment – everything has changed. Oil has asserted its fundamental nature as one of capitalism‘s most disingenuous commodities.”

    That’s a bunch of bull too, because oil asserted itself as a fundamental commodity long ago, not recently. I also do not have a clue as to what the comment about oil being a disingenuous commodity means.

    This entire article serves up no data, no concrete information. It simply puts forth the usual straw man argument that if oil is not running out, the peak oilers must be wrong. In all my life I have never seen a more disingenuous argument than the running out meme. It’s as pathetic as an argument can get.

  2. Mike999 on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 12:57 pm 

    Peak Oil People:
    Right on:
    – Oil harder to Find, more expensive to produce, but not a shortage. Peak Oil people know about “Substitution” at higher prices. Also higher prices drive exploration, at higher costs.
    – Population, projected by Exxon, to goto 9 Billion People.

    But what this guy doesn’t understand is CARTEL, selling for MARKETSHARE.

    Best Bet: My next Car is an EV, and Home Solar.

    Then You guys can let the Cartel Rob You. But, I’m Done.

  3. tahoe1780 on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 1:11 pm 

    Interesting video:

  4. GregT on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 1:37 pm 

    “Best Bet: My next Car is an EV, and Home Solar.
    Then You guys can let the Cartel Rob You. But, I’m Done.”

    Good luck to you Mikey. You’ll need it. Get your EV amour plated now, while you still can.

  5. shortonoil on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 4:38 pm 

    That’s wrong. I’ve never read any posts from other ‘peak oilers’ about running out.

    The whole article is wrong, but I doubt if that fact will dissuade future writers of similar articles. Oil was supposed to be like housing, a miraculous substance for which “prices always go up”. When their concocted hypothesis collapsed, they looked around for someone to lay the blame on. Even though they have done nothing, and still aren’t doing anything, what better villain in this story than people who are unknown, that many people don’t like, and have already been portrayed as a pack of godless communists, and terrorists.

    The oil age is now in its twilight years. The last 45% drop in price wiped out almost half of the world’s estimated reserves. Of course prices will move up, and down as they always have, and each $5 upward tick in price will be heralded as the new coming oil age. Coming, but never quite arriving. This present price collapse has permanently wounded the high production cost producers. The damage done to shale, ultra deep, arctic, and bitumen might for a while be mitigated, but it will never be reserved. Never again will either producer, or those who finance them be willing to take gargantuan leaps into the unknown. The delineation between taking on acceptable risk, and gullible stupidity is becoming increasingly apparent.

    Neither the Russians, Saudis, or the wizards of North Dakota can raise the price of oil. Petroleum is becoming increasing expensive for the world to afford. But the belief that oil prices will always go up, is still followed with a religious frenzy. Lets hope that the fervor is not accompanied with the tenacity of a witch hunt.

  6. Nony on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 5:50 pm 

    Short: and when prices rise, the reserves will come back. Who cares about some “keeping score on reserves”. What matters is how many barrels are available at what cost.

    And at a minimum, US LTO has clearly proved that there’s a meaningful tranche of oil at the 80+ price. Oil that you peakers were not counting on in 2005 or 2008. Oil that you tried to minimize as the shale boom occurred (how often did we hear “run out of sweet spots” or blip or the like? And the bottom line is only price could turn the growth, not depletion, not Rune’s Red Queen.)

    This isn’t some heaven of low cost oil. But it is meaningful in extending the plateau of usage. In fact, the slowly increasing plateu. That’s a DRASTIC difference from the Campbell, Staniford, Deffeyes, fears of mid 2000s peaker meme.

  7. bobby on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 5:55 pm 

    oil should be taken out of stock market yes the oil market is as crooked as hell, why have a oil market when one lie leads to another, i should be able to sue the united states for the crooked shit in the market, but our judges here would never allow that and oil will go back to about 76 dollars a barrel by june 2015 not because of low oil but because of crooked deals wall st nothing but short sale crooks

  8. GregT on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 6:16 pm 

    What matters Nony is the cost. Modern industrial society does not run on $80bbl + oil. The damage has already been done to the world’s economies. Affordable oil has already peaked. The dregs that have so far made up for the shortfall, have caused the global economic crisis, wars, and civil unrest.

    Expect more and more of the same going forward. Ignore reality at your own peril.

  9. Harquebus on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 7:08 pm 

    Peak oil is not about running out of oil. Another ignorant who will very shortly have to eat his words.

  10. Nony on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 8:28 pm 

    Society ran for 4 years on 80+ oil.

  11. Northwest Resident on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 8:56 pm 

    “Society ran for 4 years on 80+ oil.”

    And trillion$ in new debt, an inconvenient fact that some people don’t want to mention because it greatly diminishes the happy tune they are trying to whistle.

    Four years of 80+ oil. It broke the bank. It piled up mountains of debt that will never be paid back.

    It was the last “boom”.

    Nothing to crow about. Nothing that can be repeated, and most definitely nothing that can be sustained.

    Think of that four years as the final stretch of paved road before heading into the uncharted wilderness.

  12. rockman on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 9:13 pm 

    H – “Peak oil is not about running out of oil.” Exactly…never was…never will be. Just as it never was about PO dates nor the flow rates of conventional oil or light oils from the shale.

    It was and always will be about the interplay between the cost of energy and the effect on economies. Which means the effect on effect on every soul on the planet. And that interplay impacts virtually ever aspect of life: politics, personal finance, class/ethnic divisions, military adventures, the environment, etc.

    Which is why there’s occasional bickering about which part of the elephant is the most important despite the fact that the beast can only be classified as a pachyderm with all its parts intact. “Peak Oil” is high and low prices per bbl, increased production and declining fields, oil for votes and blood for oil, thousands of new frac’d laterals producing 100’s of bopd each and hundreds of thousands of old wells doing less then 10 bopd each, nasty oil being scrapped off the ground and high quality oil coming 25,000′ of casing to well heads sitting 5,000′ below sea level, hundreds of thousands of miles of pipelines carrying hydrocarbons underground and hundreds of thousands of rail cars carrying oil at ground level, billions of bbls of oil imported and billions of bbls of refined products exported, etc.

  13. Nony on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 10:54 pm 

    BS, Rock.

    Hubbert never mentioned price. And totally failed to discuss how it helps extraction. Deffeyes mocked the cost curve of supply: “does extra currency put barrels in the ground?”

    Peakers have a LONG history of dated peak calls and of predicting various forms of consequent armegoddon.

    Peak oil has been a miserable movement. One with emphasis on belief rather than analysis. With belief rather than falsification. With neohippy back to the landers emoting.

  14. Nony on Fri, 26th Dec 2014 10:56 pm 

    Oh…and how is “peak gas” working out? Hubbert, Kunstler, etc. have gotten their butts kicked by the Marcellus. Low price AND high volume from shale.

  15. Northwest Resident on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 1:41 am 

    Nony — I think you’re experiencing a strong moment of denial. Claiming that the peak oil “movement” has been one with emphasis on belief rather than analysis is just plain ignoring all the solid science, math, irrefutable fact and voluminous analysis that strongly backs up the inevitability of peak oil.

    It is much more correct to say that the “Cornucopian movement” is the one that is in misery (living in denial is a special form of misery). It is the Cornies that unconsciously put a strong emphasis on belief and irrational hope rather than analysis. Denying that there is a boat load of science to prove peak oil concepts is an obvious example of the denial that you and other Cornies are living with.

    BTW, “with belief rather than falsification” doesn’t make any sense. What were you trying to say? Same with “neohippy back to the landers emoting” — what does it mean?

    Get a grip, Nony. Face reality.

  16. Industrial on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 3:48 am 

    I am about to tell you 100% FACT i don’t care if you believe me or not but this is the truth and i urge you to take this information into record….Iv known about peak oil for the last decade…the first film i saw was (a crude awakening the oil crash)…when i was 23 i started to notice that i was aging…i was already dead in my mind,so i stood in front of a computer for about 4 days…on the last day i found a way to modify my cellular chromosomes….it was like some “Elysium” stuff from a pill as i felt my body change over the course of a few weeks…it took 8 months to figure out what i had done to myself….

    Your not just up against peak oil anymore in your quest to survive.Your up against me—Mike ruppert said i wouldn’t make it as a “rugged individual” so i guess i became something else…I will not stop preparing for peak oil even if i turn this planet into an oven…when it starts to get warm i will use the carbon from the bodies of the “Sane” that didn’t survive the peak to produce CFCs and turn this ball of filth into ice.Your reading words from a mind that see’s you as soylent oil…soylent CFCs.

    I want to work for the scariest deepest parts of the united states government and help them perfect the flaw that makes you capable of resisting peak oil.I tried to help “Sane” people but you declared war on me,laughed at me and beat me down and now your toxic mentality has mutated me into pure epic.

    While you are watching “spinners” im becoming so sustainable i will be watching galaxies spin—if you try to kill me with fire,every particle of dust will use “spookiness at a distance” like a beacon,to contact friendly monsters in the hubble deep field that will recycle you-carrying new suns in tow with them on there way to earth..because when i get back i will “combust” the star that warmed you.

    I think im being fairly reasonable here:)

  17. Perk Earl on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 4:19 am 

    China, Russia and Japan economies are contracting per the following articles. Is it any wonder the price of oil is dropping due to reduced demand?

    China’s Nov industrial profits suffer sharpest fall in 27 months

    Economists are debating whether the monetary easing steps taken in recent months – including late November’s surprise interest rate cut – can prove effective in a context where many companies are seeking fresh capital primarily to roll over existing debt amid weak customer demand, while China’s most successful firms remain reluctant to borrow.

    Russia forecasts economic slump

    MOSCOW (Reuters) – Slumping oil prices have put Russia’s economy on course for a sharp recession and double-digit inflation next year, government ministers said on Friday, as authorities scaled up a bailout for the first bank to succumb to this month’s rouble crisis.

    The economy is slowing sharply as Western sanctions over the Ukraine crisis deter foreign investment and spur capital flight, and as a slump in oil prices severely reduces Russia’s export revenues and pummels the rouble.

    Oil Falls as Japan Recession Reduces Fuel Demand Outlook

    West Texas Intermediate and Brent crudes dropped after Japan, the world’s third-largest oil consuming country, unexpectedly slipped into a recession.

    There was another post I saw over at Ron Patterson’s that said Nov. YOY was using 500k less oil per day in Japan.

  18. theedrich on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 4:29 am 

    What a vacuous article!  The Daily Bell writer is obviously confusing ephemeral price movements (probably at the gas pump) with some kind of refutation of the tightening Gordian Knot of supply.  The scribble is aimed at those who have a compulsive need to believe in technomagic, regardless of real-world complexity.  Not a word about depletion rates, slackening world demand or political factors, et cetera.  But then, the real purpose of the article is not truth but persuading low-information people to part with their cash.  Sigh.

  19. JuanP on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 9:30 am 

    I envy anyone who can believe this crap. Life is significantly harder for those of us that see things otherwise. I hope they are right and I am wrong.

    All I want at this point is to remain in the USA at least five more years, preferably ten, before being forced to go back to Uruguay. I will stay here until I can’t.

    I am fascinated by this oil price drop. I can’t wait for producers to start collapsing. Who will fall first, the US shale companies, the gov in Venezuela, or Nigeria’s gov? How hard will they fall? I don’t see these three lasting another six months if oil prices continue where they are. As oil extraction begins declining, prices will eventually recover for a while, IMO.

    These are interesting times indeed, and getting more interesting every day.

  20. Nony on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 9:47 am 


    The futures market predicts a recovery of $5 by the end of 2015 (up to 60 for WTI). And of an additional $5 by end of 2016. So $65 oil in a couple years. Some “glut” being worked off (temporary oversupply). This will nescesitate some production forced out. (Presumably US shale…just look at CAPEX reduced in half.)

    After end 2016, there’s a two year gap to get the next $5. (which is about the rate of inflation…maybe slightly higher, but not much). So about constant in terms of “real dollars”.

    And then after that, the curve barely rises $3 over the course of a decade (IOW, less than the time value of money).

    Of course, the futures curve is just a distilled guess of all the people putting money on the line. It can’t predict the future. But it seems to think we are looking at some moderate “glut” to work off. But pretty moderate. And not buying into Hamilton’s 100+ oil for the duration.

    My interpretation of the curve is the market looks at shale (maybe tar sands a bit) as the marginal barrels. Get price too high and they crash the market. Get too low and they will shut-in (no profit).

    Even the long term tail of slightly decreasing “real price” post 2018 can be explained in terms of small, slow increases in efficiency. It’s definitely NOT the curve you would expect if shale is a “blip”, will run out soon, will use up the sweet spots, blabla.

    Basically shale ended up being DARNED important. And the people who talked it down were wrong. Maybe even wrong because their bias affected their Bayesian judgement. Would be good to see how many (Piccolo, Rune, Hamilton) would have put their money on the line for their failed predictions. Andy Hall gets a pass with me. He manned up and went long. [And maybe learned a life lesson…more reading THE PRIZE, less reading peak oil bloggers. ;-)]

  21. Nony on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 9:52 am 

    IN fact, you wouldn’t even have the current crash if the market thought that shale would “go away soon”. People were saying that for a while and what ended up happening was every year, US LTO beat predictions, beat EIA strongly, beat peaker/doomer predictions by a MILE, and even beat cornie predictions.

    Ain’t no doubt in my mind that if price stayed at 100+, we’d have had another 1.5 MM bpd increase in 2015.

    Well…after 4 years of this crap from US LTO, the market ended up saying “enough is enough”. You are getting too big for your britches. You are affecting world volumes. Let me drop the price and put you back in your cage. 😉

    [That’s how the invisible hand thinks…it has a personality. It telepaths to me.]


  22. Kenz300 on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 10:00 am 

    The high cost swing producers are shale, tar sands and deep water producers……. they are cutting back……..

    Why is the Keystone pipeline needed? ……..

  23. Nony on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 10:05 am 

    Because it reduces transport cost out of Canada and out of the Bakken. And it’s privately funded. Not even a government slush fund (maybe that’s why Obama doesn’t like it).

    Give it the damned permit and let it get built. Clear out the BS legal hurdles. Let the pipeline investors take their own risks.

    So much for “infrastructure president”. Pretty damned clear project with clear objective. With clear rationale for what the infrastructure would do. Not a bridge to nowhere. But Obama stops it.

  24. PeterEV on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 10:15 am 

    GregT: Why should he get it armour plated?

    The ideal situation is for EVs to be adopted while gas-powered car sales dwindle in tune with oil depletion (i.e., higher costs) and solar energy becoming cheaper and more efficient.

    The low maintenance of an EV does not bode well for parts stores and auto maintenance shops but the change over should be slow. I think we can look at the change over from horse and buggy to automobiles and airplanes to view a similar situation.

  25. shortonoil on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 10:20 am 

    China, Russia and Japan economies are contracting per the following articles. Is it any wonder the price of oil is dropping due to reduced demand?

    For over 100 years petroleum powered the growth of the industrial world:

    It not only powered that growth, it was able to increase its supply, and also pay for the additional expense of doing it. Production increased, its price increased, and the world’s GDP increased. Like a magic chalice in a Fairy Tale, it appeared to be giving perpetual riches, and the people began to believe that the cup that never empties would flow forever.

    About 2012 the evil witch appeared, and stole the cup; her name was depletion. Petroleum lost it miraculous ability to continually increase its supply, support its ever growing cost of production, and increase the world’s general wealth through ever growing GDP. Unknown to the people, the magic of the cup was energy. Even Fairy Tales recognize that magic fades, and the magic of petroleum’s energy is no different.

    Without their magic cup the money lenders attempted to create wealth out of thin air. Like cheap magicians, the ogres of industry attempted to create it with slight of hand, deceit and parlor tricks. These counterfeit substitutes for the magic of the cup, only resulted in building debt, and destroying confidence. The evil witch depletion is not to be so easily foiled.

    In 2012 petroleum reached its energy half way point; the point where it required one half of the energy content of the oil to extract, process and distribute it. After that point was reached there was no extra energy to pay for its increasing production cost, to increase its production, and grow the world’s GDP. After that point the magic chalice turned into an average bar mug, and continual dependence on it will result in nothing but ruin.

    Without the magic of the cup our situation looks truly dire. Many want to believe that a knight in shining armor will ride to the rescue, carrying another magic chalice to bring prosperity, and wealth. They may have to wait a very long time. That kind of thing only happens in Fairy Tales.

  26. Apneaman on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 10:29 am 

    This guy is so fucking stupid he has a hard time standing up straight. Can there be any greater testament to the power of fossil fuels than the fact that it has enabled tens of millions of morons like this author to live consequence free and breed for generations?

  27. Nony on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 10:31 am 

    What’s happened is not a DROP in demand, but a drop in the EXPECTED GROWTH of demand.

    They key thing is to look at volume:

    Look at the panel on right, “total world consumption” line. What you will see is year over year, every year is up, including the 2015 projection. Vastly different story in 2008 to 2009, when there was a DROP in volume itself.

    What’s the lesson here? what’s the insight? what can we learn? The lesson is that a lot of the previous high pricing was based on anticipated demand growth. When we have a reduction in EXPECTED GROWTH (not an expectation of decline or a real decline), that moved the market. IOW, Yergin talking about China growth behind price increases was a lot more right than Hamilton blathering about depletion (as if it is some new idea to the world).

    But then again, Hamilton is a macro-weenie. A trend follower. With poor microeconomic instincts. That’s why he got his butt whipped with his 100+ call, right before a crash. What a joke that guy is. What a stuffed shirt. What a fake. And now, he can’t even write a clear column and say “I was wrong”. Guy is a coward.

  28. penury on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 12:15 pm 

    My opinion of whether we will be treated to PO or POD is of no interest or relevance to anyone. If you want an unbiased opinion read the military Intel reports. O.K all you can get are the unclassified versions, but these contain enough information that you should be able to identify the trends in fossil fuels. Look at the military actions since the turn of the century. Look where the military is putting their money. The Navy and Air Force want planes that run on other than fossil fuel. They are developing weapons and weapons delivery systems which eliminate a large use of fossil fuels. Military Intel gets a lot of scorn, but they have sources in every country in the world, practically every major industry and their leaders are not the dumbest rocks in the box. List the countries of interest and then check a map of where the greatest known quantities of fossil fuels are located. The current largest monkey wrench in the works is the rising value of the dollar. It is not in our interest to bankrupt the EM but they owe over 8 trillion dollars of debt and a strong dollar will bankrupt them and plunge the world into chaos. PO or POD most Americans still believe that this country will be the last economy standing and are not planning accordingly.

  29. Fuck U.Texans on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 3:15 pm 

    The longer Texas terrorists keep getting a boot out in their asses, the better.

    May all Texans/Texas rot in hell for attacking this country over the last 5 decades with all these war/oil profiteering ventures that have left millions dead.

  30. Hubert on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 5:53 pm 

    The author has misinterpreted this situation. Peak oil is real. When you watch U.S. drillers cease because they can’t afford to drill for less than $60 per barrel, you are staring into the face of peak oil. Never again will the U.S. and Canada be able to extract cheap oil. If this isn’t peak oil, I don’t know what is. Not to mention, Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Middle East have started building gigantic solar farms in a bid to power their own countries and even supply Europe with electricity. Apparently the author thinks he knows even more about plentiful oil than these middle eastern kingdoms? Not!

  31. Brandon on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 5:58 pm 

    Is this article a joke?

    There are so many points raised that need citation or proof that have nothing.

    A real tinfoil hat diatribe.

  32. tahoe1780 on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 6:06 pm 

    Can anybody product a chart of NET oil production; i.e. oil available after oil used to deliver refinery input? Came across this interesting chart the other day:

  33. Waterworld oil bigot on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 6:11 pm 

    Quote “Nothing much that the warmists have predicted has come true &
    We remember, for instance, that snow was to have melted off the Alps by now..

    My god which ignorant moron has the guts to write such thing while Chinese glaciers are completely melting away at this point!
    All this which is going to have a huge impact on that part of the world incl ours.

    Me thinking this bozo needs another job straight away, what about cleaning the streets from plastics?!

  34. GregT on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 7:15 pm 

    Peter EV,

    “I think we can look at the change over from horse and buggy to automobiles and airplanes to view a similar situation.”

    Sorry Peter, you are a little mixed up in your thought process. Moving from horse and buggy to automobiles and airplanes was gradual and evolutionary. Moving from automobiles and airplanes back to horse and buggy will be abrupt, and revolutionary.

    The vast majority will have zero ability to take care of themselves. The extremely tiny minority of people driving around in their EVs had better be well armed. Don’t understand what I am talking about? Do a little research on Argentina prior to the end of the age of oil, and get back to me.

  35. John Orr on Sat, 27th Dec 2014 7:57 pm 

    The cost of a barrel of oil is 40% of the UK problem….the real 60% of the problem is the 60% tax going to the UK government!!!

  36. hp on Sun, 28th Dec 2014 4:08 am 

    son never read stupid piece.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *