Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Economic Models

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: Math Models of Economic Concepts

Unread postby CrudeAwakening » Thu 25 Aug 2005, 00:32:02

Just thinking: won't there be a time lag between the market adjusting to (D-S) and prices changing accordingly?

So that P'(t) = k(D(t-s), S(t-s))

where s is a constant time value indicating the lag of information?

i.e prices don't begin to adjust instantly in response to changes in demand and supply, it takes time for the info to filter through. Obviously in some markets s will be larger than in others.
User avatar
CrudeAwakening
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue 28 Jun 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Math Models of Economic Concepts

Unread postby nero » Thu 25 Aug 2005, 05:06:31

Almost there, I shouldn't have used the term equilibrium I really mean ideal. I was meaning ideal like a reversible process in thermodynamics. In an ideal system D and S can be equal to each other and changing at the same time. In the real world to a first aproximation that is what really happens. The demand for oil is 84 mbpd and the supply for oil is 84 mbpd and both are increasing by about 2% a year.

Yes I'm familiar with derivatives, differential equations, statistics and that stuff. You could say we are on speaking terms but we don't have each other over for tea.
Biofuels: The "What else we got to burn?" answer to peak oil.
User avatar
nero
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat 22 May 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

Re: Math Models of Economic Concepts

Unread postby kmann » Thu 25 Aug 2005, 12:11:32

ElijahJones wrote:We want this system to have an equilibrium at D=S. To do that either k[2] =P and k[3]=1/P giving

P'=k[1](D-S)
D'= S
S'= D

Or k[2] and k[3] are function of P (at least) such that

limit (D-S->0, k[2] = P)
limit(D-S->0, k[3] = 1/P)



Wouldn't equalibrium be defined as P'=D'=S'=0? (as well as D=S)
User avatar
kmann
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Math Models of Economic Concepts

Unread postby WebHubbleTelescope » Fri 26 Aug 2005, 23:53:10

I would like to see the relationships applied to something like bottled water. I seriously think you could make some headway in solving the pricing mechanisms for that stuff. And then how does it apply to something like tap water. If you can use those as calibration points, given that water definitely is an infinitely replenishable resource (for all intents and purposes), you might be able to explain why a gallon of gasoline costs on the order as much as a gallon of bottled water right now, but will go through the roof with demand destruction.

This would really get the rank&file thinking about the economics of oil.

Otherwise the partials you spec'd up would not really be that hard to solve with something like a Runge-Kutte integrator. You would have to be careful to make the dt's small enough to keep it stable though. Non-linear formulations can give different, even chaotic, responses depending on the size of the delta's.
User avatar
WebHubbleTelescope
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu 08 Jul 2004, 02:00:00

Re: Math Models of Economic Concepts

Unread postby WebHubbleTelescope » Sat 08 Oct 2005, 17:51:22

Elijah,
Over in the depletion modeling thread, there is a push to get the economics into the models:
http://www.peakoil.com/post196552.html

Having another good mathematician over there can't hurt.
User avatar
WebHubbleTelescope
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu 08 Jul 2004, 02:00:00

Re: Math Models of Economic Concepts

Unread postby WebHubbleTelescope » Fri 14 Oct 2005, 20:42:20

I lost track, P is price, right?

The only way a sinusoid can come out of the result is due to feed-forward elements. The exponential is typically due to integration (i.e. accumulation) of past, lagged events, while the sinusoid comes about due to derivatives (i.e. rates of changes) perhaps in anticipation of future events.

In the typical extraction model, ignoring price, I have only considered the lag parameters but I see value in considering the lead parameters. The big problem is that the feed forward parameters usually switch on and off without warning, which leads to a difficulty in achieving a stationary solution.
User avatar
WebHubbleTelescope
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu 08 Jul 2004, 02:00:00

The Problem with EIA Shale Gas and Tight Oil Forecasts

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 04 Apr 2018, 16:00:44


Each year the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) produces forecasts of U.S. oil and gas production in its Annual Energy Outlook (AEO), which is widely viewed as an authoritative assessment of what to expect for future U.S. oil and gas output (the EIA prefers the term “projection” to “forecast”). The EIA’s reference case is considered as the most likely scenario by industry, policy makers, and the media. Considering that AEO reference case forecasts for shale gas and tight oil production in recent releases are remarkably optimistic when considered at the play-level in terms of well productivity, decline rates and prospective areas, I find this baffling and worrisome. It’s one thing for industry to paint a rosy picture of future production, but something altogether different when a government agency—tasked with providing the American public with objective information—does it. AEO2018, for example, projects that


The Problem with EIA Shale Gas and Tight Oil Forecasts
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4291
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Economic Models

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 04 Apr 2018, 16:04:36

Interesting that in his anti-EIA pronouncements, David doesn't notice that the last graph presented appears to track pretty closely the USGS estimate for the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland basin. And then David presents no geologic information to refute what appears to be the EIA using the best geologic information available to base their estimates upon?

I would like to see David's geology work, rather then him pretending he knows anything about well performance, work that as best I can tell is even worse than what Art Berman once pumped out. Which is saying alot, but then neither of these guys have ever had to put their name on a companies reserve report I imagine.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4291
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Economic Models

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 04 Apr 2018, 16:16:15

AdamB wrote:Interesting that in his anti-EIA pronouncements, David doesn't notice that the last graph presented appears to track pretty closely the USGS estimate for the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland basin. And then David presents no geologic information to refute what appears to be the EIA using the best geologic information available to base their estimates upon?

This is generally the fast crash doomer playbook. Emotion over data or logic.

And, of course, ignore nine kazillion bad predictions from the likes of zerohedge, while complaining that the long term forecasts of outfits like the EIA or IEA aren't perfect.

Of course, this all seems perfectly rational to the fast crash doomer crowd. :roll:
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4888
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Economic Models

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Wed 04 Apr 2018, 18:27:55

To comment about what OS just said, I'd like to plug the "Free Slow Crash" manifesto which is a useful online PDF document called "Peak Energy, Climate Change, and the Collapse of Global Civilization". It is found all over the web and everybody should read it. It's freely downloadable as it was somebody's PHD thesis in 2010, look for the revised 2nd release version under the same title.

The other work of note is a copywrited book which you should also read if you have not already. It was published in 2005 by James H. Kunstler under the title The Long Emergency. It's worth paying for. Yeah, I know most people's opinion of the author, but this work is easily worth the less-than-$10 cost.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008UX3KY2/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

As most of you know, I am a champion of the "Slow Crash" form of Doom. I think the real emergency started about 1798 when the Rev. Thomas R. Malthus published An Essay on the Principle of Population. He had recognized the time when the human population of Planet Earth had exceeded the capacity of the eco-system to heal the damage it caused.

Our world has been dying since then. Peak Oil is the most prominent resource shortage, and the one that will probably hurt the human apes the most, and provoke numerous other shortages. In case you have not figured it out yet, I believe that all of us have lived our complete lives within the slow crash scenario, as did your Grandfather and even earlier ancestors. As will your Grandchildren if you are fortunate enough to have any. They will be seriously inconvenienced by Peak Oil, it will be reality for them, not the academic discussion it is for us.

In case you are in doubt about the rest of my beliefs, trying to model the exact date or impact of Peak Oil is a fruitless endeavor, because the prime variable is human behavior. We do not possess a Calculus of human behavior and we are not likely to ever have one. In spite of your pressing need to know the exact date of Peak Oil, this will be obvious only years after it happens, and in retrospect. BTW, my date is 2nd quarter 2008, for reasons I have enumerated many times.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4785
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Economic Models

Unread postby onlooker » Thu 05 Apr 2018, 07:10:29

I do not think it is very productive or useful to highlight time frames per say. And especially to attempt predictions related to time intevals. What is I believe more useful is to gauge the increasing pressures and vulnerabilities within the Natural Systems and Human impacts. We have valuable sources of data that assesses precisely these variables. What is telling is that we are increasing our pressure on the Natural World via our ways of living and our continuous increase in population. This is putting pressure on a host of systems that support human life and well being.

For instance, a human pandemic is becoming ever more possible as we venture into previously inaccessible areas and as people cram ever more into the cities and as the pathogens are becoming ever more adaptive to our antibiotic medicines.
Another trenchant barometer is potable water. Highly populated places like India and China are approaching dangerously low aquifer levels and fresh water supplies. Plus, the ecosystems everywhere are being debilitated from species die off, takeover by human ecosystems , by pollution and finally now we are seeing from GW.
Finally, full blown collapse will not be uniform either in time or space. So, no singular moment will be reached when global civilization has collapsed. Rather, certain places at certain times will degrade rapidly, while others will not. Of course, what people do or do not do, will influence what areas and societies can hang on longer. I think it is too early to assess whether remnants of human civilization will persist beyond this century.
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8882
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Previous

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests