Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on February 7, 2014
Oil and Gas: How Little Is Left
“If we’re doing things like fracking, it just shows how little is left of all this stuff, and how desperate we are to get at it.” — Anonymous
Global production of conventional oil is past its peak and is now beginning its decline. A mixed bag of unconventional fuels (shale oil, tar-sands oil, natural-gas-liquids, etc.) is keeping the total on a slight rise or a rough plateau.
The hottest discussion in the US over the last few years has involved the fracturing (“fracking”) of shale to extract both oil and gas, but production by this method is already slowing or in decline. The costs of fracking are considerable, and so is the environmental damage.
The price of oil is still about $100 a barrel, far above that of the 1990s, in terms of both nominal and real dollars. The failure of the price to go down is an embarrassment to those who think unconventional oil is really solving any problems. But the high price is due not just to increased demand or to geopolitical risk. It is because of trying to squeeze oil out of places where it makes little sense to be squeezing.
The following data are “annual” and “global” and are from BP’s 2013 report unless described otherwise.
Laherrère: “The plots of these data start flattening in 2005, followed by a bumpy plateau. The post-2010 increase is mainly caused by the increase of liquids from US shale gas and US shale oil.”
Hughes: “. . . Politicians and industry leaders alike now hail ‘one hundred years of gas’ and anticipate the U.S. regaining its crown as the world’s foremost oil producer. . . . The much-heralded reduction of oil imports in the past few years has in fact been just as much a story of reduced consumption, primarily related to the Great Recession, as it has been a story of increased production.”
RATE OF SUPPLY; NET ENERGY
Hughes: “The metric most commonly cited to suggest a new age of fossil fuels is the estimate of in situ unconventional resources and the purported fraction that can be recovered. These estimates are then divided by current consumption rates to produce many decades or centuries of future consumption. In fact, two other metrics are critically important in determining the viability of an energy resource:
“• The rate of energy supply — that is, the rate at which the resource can be produced. A large in situ resource does society little good if it cannot be produced consistently and in large enough quantities. . . . Tar sands . . . have yielded production of less than two percent of world oil requirements.
“• The net energy yield of the resource. . . . The net energy . . . of unconventional resources is generally much lower than for conventional resources. . . .”
GLOBAL OIL PRODUCTION
For conventional oil, the peak annual global production was about 27 billion barrels, or about 73 million barrels per day. The peak date of production was about 2010.
BP shows global oil production still increasing in 2012, although much more slowly than before — an annual increase of about 1 percent between 2002 and 2012, as opposed to about 9 percent annually between 1930 and 2001. Laherrère’s Figure 10, on the other hand, shows an actual peak at 2010. The difference is due to the fact that the BP figures include unconventional oil (shale oil, tar-sands oil, natural-gas-liquids, etc.).
According to most studies, the likely average rate of decline of oil production after the peak date is about 3 or 4 percent, resulting in a fall from peak production to half that amount between 10 and 20 years after the peak. However, there is also evidence (Höök et al., June 2009; Simmons, 2006) to suggest that the decline rate might be closer to 6 percent, i.e. reaching the halfway point in about 10 years after the peak.
Per capita, the peak date of oil production was 1979, when there were 5.5 barrels of oil per person annually, as opposed to 4.4 in 2012.
Laherrère: “The confidential technical data on [mean values of proven + probable reserves] is only available from expensive and very large scout databases. . . .
“There is a huge difference between the political/financial proved reserves [so-called], and the confidential technical [proven + probable] reserves. Most economists do not believe in peak oil. They rely only on the proved reserves coming from [the Oil and Gas Journal, the US Energy Information Administration], BP and OPEC data, which are wrong; they have no access to the confidential technical data. . . .
“The last [International Energy Agency] forecasts report an increase in oil production from 2012 to 2018 of 8% for Non-OPEC (+30% for the US) and of 7% for OPEC, which is doubtful. . . .”
US OIL PRODUCTION peaked in 1970 at 9,637 thousand barrels daily, declined in 2008 to 5,000, and rose in 2013 to 6,488.
NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION
GLOBAL GAS PRODUCTION rose from 2,524 billion cubic meters in 2002 to 3,370 billion cubic meters (95 trillion cubic feet) in 2012, an average annual increase of 3%.
Laherrère: “. . . [Global] production will peak around 2020 at more than [100 trillion cubic feet per year].”
“Outside the US, the potential of shale gas is very uncertain because the “Not In My Back Yard” effect is much stronger when the gas belongs to the country and not to the landowners. . . . Up to now, there is no example of economical shale gas production outside the US. The hype on shale gas will probably fall like the hype on bio-fuels a few years ago. . . .
US GAS PRODUCTION rose from 536 billion cubic meters in 2002 to 681 in 2012, an average annual increase of 2.5%.
Laherrère: “Natural gas production in the US, which peaked in 1970 like oil, is showing a sharp increase since 2005 because of shale gas. In 2011 unconventional gas production ([coal bed methane], tight gas and shale gas . . . .) was higher than conventional gas production . . . .
“This . . . leads to a peak in 2020 at 22 [trillion cubic feet] and the decline thereafter of all natural gas in the US . . . should be quite sharp. The goal of exporting US liquefied natural gas seems to be based on very optimistic views. . . .
“The gross monthly natural gas production in the US has been flat since October of 2011, after its sharp increase since 2003, with only shale gas production rising. . . .
“Some claim that the US can export its shale gas as [liquid natural gas] even though conventional gas . . . is declining fast and will be quite small in just a few years.”
Hughes: “Shale gas production has grown explosively to account for nearly 40 percent of U.S. natural gas production; nevertheless production has been on a plateau since December 2011. . . . The very high decline rates of shale gas wells require continuous inputs of capital — estimated at $42 billion per year. . . . In comparison, the value of shale gas produced in 2012 was just $32.5 billion.”
TIGHT OIL (SHALE OIL) PRODUCTION
Laherrère: “Shale oil is now called light tight oil because the production in Bakken is not from a shale reservoir, but a sandy dolomite reservoir between two shale formations. . . . In Montana, production from Bakken is mainly coming from the stratigraphic field called Elm Coulee, which is decline since 2008. In North Dakota, production from Bakken has sharply increased.”
Hughes: “Tight oil production has grown impressively and now makes up about 20 percent of U.S. oil production. . . .More than 80 percent of tight oil production is from two unique plays: the Bakken in North Dakota and Montana and the Eagle Ford in southern Texas. . . . Tight oil plays are characterized by high decline rates. . . . Tight oil production is projected to grow substantially from current levels to a peak in 2017. . . .
TAR-SANDS OIL PRODUCTION
Hughes: “Tar sands oil is primarily imported to the U.S. from Canada. . . It is low-net-energy oil, requiring very high levels of capital inputs (with some estimates of over $100 per barrel required for mining with upgrading in Canada). . . . The economics of much of the vast purported remaining extractable resources are increasingly questionable. . . .
NATURAL GAS PLANT LIQUIDS (NGPL) PRODUCTION
Laherrère: “World NGPL production . . . may peak in 2030 at over 11 [million barrels per day]. . . .”
OTHER RESOURCES
Hughes: “Other unconventional fossil fuel resources, such as oil shale [kerogen], coalbed methane, gas hydrates, and Arctic oil and gas — as well as technologies like coal- and gas-to-liquids, and in situ coal gasification — are also sometimes proclaimed to be the next great energy hope. But each of these is likely to be a small player. . . .
“Deepwater oil and gas production . . . would expand access to only relatively minor additional resources.”
CONCLUSIONS
Laherrère: “Peak oil deniers claim that peak oil is an unscientific theory, ignoring that peak oil has actually happened in several countries like France, UK, Norway. They confuse proved reserves with the [proven + probable] mean reserves. . . . It seems that world oil (all liquids) production will peak before 2020. . . The dream of the US becoming independent seems to be based on resources, but not on reserves.”
REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
BP. (2013). Global statistical review of world energy. Retrieved from http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview
Heinberg, Richard. (2013). Snake oil: How fracking’s false promise of plenty imperils our future. Santa Rosa, California: Post Carbon Institute.
Höök, M., Hirsch, R., & Aleklett, K. (2009, June). Giant oil field decline rates and their influence on world oil production. Energy Policy, Volume 37, Issue 6, pp. 2262-72. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.02.020
Hughes, J. D. (2013, Feb.) Drill, baby, drill; Can unconventional fuels usher in a new era of energy abundance? Executive Summary. Post Carbon Institute. Retrieved from http://www.postcarbon.org/reports/DBD-report-FINAL.pdf
Klare, Michael T. (2012).The race for what’s left: The scramble for the world’s last resources. New York: Picador.
Laherrère, J. H. (2013, July 16). World oil and gas production forecasts up to 2100. The Oil Drum. Retrieved from www.theoildrum.com/node/10009
Simmons, M. R. (2006). Twilight in the desert: The coming Saudi oil shock and the world economy. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Originally posted at:
http://survivepeakoil.blogspot.ca/2014/02/oil-and-gas-how-little-is-left.html
39 Comments on "Oil and Gas: How Little Is Left"
Makati1 on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 1:47 am
The problem is that there is still too much left to burn, not too little.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 1:59 am
“…the confidential technical data.”
That would be the data which, if available, would crush all the hopes and dreams of the BAU forever crowd.
Just guessing.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 2:02 am
Damn, what can one add to that discussion other than diito. I think what impressed me the most is the talk on depletion rates. Heard it before but this is coming from heavy hitters.
“According to most studies, the likely average rate of decline of oil production after the peak date is about 3 or 4 percent, resulting in a fall from peak production to half that amount between 10 and 20 years after the peak. However, there is also evidence (Höök et al., June 2009; Simmons, 2006) to suggest that the decline rate might be closer to 6 percent, i.e. reaching the halfway point in about 10 years after the peak.”
Now if that is not a “Thelma & Louise” let me know. I again state collapse possible anytime with financial crisis with the glass ceiling 2020 when the full effects are felt from the energy decent. I think J-Gav’s 2017 is probably most realistic with N/R’s 2015 as possible with the financial crisis as the tipping point
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 3:31 am
“I think J-Gav’s 2017 is probably most realistic with N/R’s 2015 as possible with the financial crisis as the tipping point.”
And don’t expect it to be a cakewalk right up to 2015, or 2017, or 2020 — whenever it is. We can probably expect to see things begin to really start unravel in small but growing steps from here on out. TPTB have their media and communications machines working overtime, trying to keep the nervous masses calm. BAU teeters on the edge of a steep cliff. Some very interesting developments are heading our way — hold on tight.
Rusty Baker on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 3:34 am
I’m gettin’ tired of all these liberal rags spewing egregious propaganda about oil “running out”.The fact of the matter is that there is at least a 100-years worth of oil(at global current rates of consumption) under the Bakken and Eagle Ford Shale formations alone. I’ve seen all the drilling and fracking firsthand in Texas and North Dakota. The rigs haven’t even fracked 1/8th of the total shale yet. I don’t understand how fairly intelligent people can take this blatant marxist propaganda seriously. I mean, if peak oil already happened, why hasn’t the price of crude reached or surpassed the levels we saw back in 2008? On the contrary, oil prices have decreased since then.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 6:31 am
Rusty — It is easy to get misled by all the false information being pumped out through the media. Just go to Google and search on this phrase: “Bakken decline rates”. You’ll find a lot of information from credible sources that tell the exact opposite story of what you have been lead to believe. But in the end, I suppose most people will simply believe what they want to believe until they can’t anymore. The global financial situation and the oil situation are intricately tied together. If you keep an open mind and do some honest investigation, you might start to understand what is going on. If not, then you would be like most people.
BTW, peakoil is anything but a “liberal rag”. It is simply a news consolidator for articles related to oil, economy and implications of the problems we’re having in those two areas. Articles are posted here from Bloomberg, Forbes and other very conservative-oriented news sources. Anybody reading the collection of articles presented on this site is free to come to their own conclusions.
markh on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 9:29 am
Rusty- we will see, won’t we? In the meantime, I follow the credo of “hope for the best, but plan for the worst.”
westexas on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 11:47 am
Recent annual Brent crude oil prices:
2008: $97
2009: $62
2010: $80
2011: $111
2012: $112
2013: $109
Annual Brent crude oil prices have been above the 2008 level for three straight years.
Assuming a conservative overall decline rate of 10%/year in existing US oil wells (this would be the percentage decline in production from 2013 to 2014, if no new wells were completed in 2014), in order to maintain 2013 annual US crude oil production for 10 years, the industry would have to replace 100% of current production in 10 years–the productive equivalent of every oil field in the US.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 12:05 pm
Rusty, you have seen a very very small part of global production if you have seen the rigs in North Dakota and Texas. Can I suggest you cash in your frequent flyer points and take a big global tour. When you get done with that talk to some geologist that are not on the take. Then talk to a few intellectuals about the economy, prices, Capex, and systematic risk. After this schooling come back here and give us an update. I want this dire situation to not be as bad as it is but this is reality and reality is not always warm and fuzzy!
rockman on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 3:05 pm
Davy – “…talk to some geologist that are not on the take”. On the take!?! You mean someone might actually pay me to help pour the Kool-Aid? Where do I sign up?
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 3:52 pm
I may be wrong Rock but the gold rush may be about panned out for talking snake oil
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 3:52 pm
I’m an IT web developer who is also on the take. Give me enough money and I’ll build you a website that will pump out your deluded vision of the world and any hopium/lies that you can think up. Cheap!
rockman on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 4:06 pm
Rusty – A bit of help with your math: “The fact of the matter is that there is at least a 100 years’ worth of oil(at global current rates of consumption) under the Bakken and Eagle Ford Shale formations alone.” So your numbers: Current global consumption = 88 million bopd X 365 days X 100 years = 3.2 TRILLION bo consumption over the next 100 years.
Current reserves estimates for the Bakken and Eagle Ford. Note the USGS number is technically recoverable…not commercially viable:
“The Bakken Formation and Three Forks Formation, which spans parts of Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota together hold an estimated 7.4 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil, the U.S. Geological Survey study said”
“The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the Eagle ford Shale holds between 7 billion to 10 billion barrels of oil.”
So let’s round up to be fair: Bakken = 10 billion bo; EFS 10 billion bo. So combined that’s 20 billion of oil
Which means you estimate is 160X higher than some of the more optimistic numbers being put out by anyone. Perhaps it might be good for you to hang around this “liberal rag”. At least we can provide you with some help with your math. And if you weren’t aware this is just a friendly poke in the ribs from a petroleum geologist with 40 years’ experience. Doesn’t necessarily make me smarter than anyone else. But as a result I have developed some decent math skills. LOL.
BTW: “if peak oil already happened, why hasn’t the price of crude reached or surpassed the levels we saw back in 2008? On the contrary, oil prices have decreased since then.” PO has nothing to do with the price of oil. It’s strictly about the max global rate of oil that will ever be realized. The price of oil is determined by a complex and very dynamic relationship between supply and demand. But “fairly intelligent people” understand that.
rockman on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 4:09 pm
Davy – I’ve been doing this for 4 decades. I’ve learned from the best: with enough hype I can sell ice to an Eskimo. LOL.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 4:30 pm
Rock you might add rigging to the list of the price determiners!
I tried to get into the Geological engineering field in the mid-1980’s but got my butt killed by the math. So I ended up in finance where the math is debatable
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 4:49 pm
rockman — I took an intro to Geology course in college — a four credit full on basic science course — as one of my electives because I was so interested in Geology. I’ve always been very interested in Geology and have a “basic” understanding due to the things I learned in that class. Knowing it all like you do must be even better. How the earth was formed and all the geological processes that went into shaping this rock to its present form is fascinating stuff.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 5:03 pm
NR we are only here by geological acquiescence!!!
pretty profound field to study.
I might add we are modern and global only because of fossil fuels…somewhere a rock lover played his part in this. Rock you better be careful some people are really upset with what fossil fuels have done to the world. Radicals may turn on the geologist
Nony on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 5:05 pm
2019 futures are at 75/bbl. That’s not hype. That’s hard money betting.
To me this indicates a middle course. We ARE running out of easy to get oil. But there are sufficient supplies of hard to get oil to satisfy demand.
The mid-200s Simmons/Cambell/TOD predictions of “cliffs” and face-plants in the desert were off. I think it is good to adjust your worldview based on more data…and to be wary of trying to make things fit your preconceptions.
TOD closed for a reason. And yeah, fracking is not the discovery of high temperature superconductors. But it has advanced and evolved and become more important (Mitchell and Hamm took some risks and generated some learning).
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hC819n9EoFM/UfkIFielYMI/AAAAAAAAAlw/wgwD7GDqfqQ/s1600/screenshot_12.jpg
Nony on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 5:14 pm
Oh…and the marginal barrels have a big role in setting price. If we didn’t have that 2 million bpd from the shale-heroes, we would have a higher world price. Also, to the extent that we open areas for drilling in the free world, it is useful as a brake on OPEC. So, it is making a difference.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 5:30 pm
Nony — “2019 futures are at 75/bbl. That’s not hype. That’s hard money betting.”
It seems to me and a lot of others that the entire stock market including futures is a rigged and fraudulent game. Nothing you see in the stock market these days can be trusted — it is all faked. Surely you see that. Predicting the future based on what you see in futures doesn’t sound like a winning strategy to me.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 5:48 pm
Nony, sounds logical. BUT, Are you able to elaborate on why the financial markets are a mess? That is surely not oil related. Can you clear up the haze in my head why capex is so high and production has barely moved? Please tell me why demand is dropping in developed economies. I need to know at what point is the marginal supply the determinant in affecting price or is it demand destruction and a multitude of other factors. I hope I am wrong and you are right that everything will be fine. That is what I hear everywhere today from the traditional sources. I will put away the Xanax cause I feel better now.
Have you ever heard of “backwardation” that is what your futures are saying and that is typical in the oil market? I might add along with gold and FX markets the most manipulated and rigged market in our finance system. Commodity prices today are phantoms of a manipulated and corrupt system. The fundamentals are a thing of the past. Tell me what is real today. We have a crisis today of price discovery and true value!
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 5:50 pm
beat me to it NR you high tech guy!!
Rusty Baker on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 5:53 pm
Rockman, your numbers seem credible but upon further scrutiny they are specious at best. The numbers you cite are from the US geological service–which is a known shill and arm of the corporate banks and media. With that said, it’s in the best interests of the corporate mafia to underestimate crude oil reserves because they can artificially raise the price of oil. The globalist elites have disseminated the theory of peak oil so they can rake in billions more in profits. So far, the gullible liberal masses have swallowed this lie hook, line and sinker. The truth is that there is, at the very least, 500 years-worth of oil left. So, for all the rest of you pinko lefties on this thread, I suggest you brush up on your facts before you engage in a serious debate over oil reserves. This is coming from a humble deckhand in the oil fields of Texas, I know all this stuff from firsthand sources with close connections to the oil industry. This isn’t data gathered through the grapevine like on most of these liberal forums.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 6:09 pm
Davy — Now you know. They call me “the quickest keyboarder” in the west.
“…it’s in the best interests of the corporate mafia to underestimate crude oil reserves because they can artificially raise the price of oil.”
No, Rusty, it is in the best interests of the “corporate mafia” to keep you and the rest of the misinformed masses in the dark as to the true nature of our oil and financial dilemma. Looks like you’ve fallen for the hype, Rusty, hook line and sinker. I might add that your name calling and blanket characterizations of people reading/posting on this site just makes you look like the retarded baboon that you no doubt are.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 6:28 pm
Sure Rusty there is 500 years of oil left. Us pinko lefties agree with that and we agree there is allot more than that. There is an incredible amount of gold dissolved in sea water. There is an incredible amount of water on the earth. Rusty why is gold so scarce? Why do we have water scarcity? Rusty, have you ever owned or run a business. You will find when you run a business there is something called ROI. If you go out and spend 1MIL and get back $100K in production and you have a CAPEX budget of 10MIL. Tell me how long you will continue to drill for oil!
Rusty Baker on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 7:12 pm
Davy, you might assume I’m some right-wing loon but I know what I know what I’m talking about. I know about the concept of EROEI: I’ve read the books by M. King Hubbert, Colin Campbell, James Howard Kunstler, Matt Simmons, Kenneth Deffeyes, Michael Ruppert, and Richard Heinberg among others. I once believed in the peak oil theory, but after all the failed predictions of these so-called “prophets” of the peak oil movement, I had to move on with my life. After much disappointment and rumination over the musings of these aforementioned authors and speakers, I concluded that they are either misinformed or deliberate liars. I think it’s more likely that they are hucksters hawking their apocalyptic predictions and writings to gullible, vulnerable people–Not unlike cult leaders and religious demagogues.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 7:27 pm
Rusty — I don’t know about Davy, but I do assume that you are some kind of right-wing loon, if for no other reason than it is only right-wing loons who go around accusing people they disagree with of being “pinko lefties”. You know, if it quacks and looks like a duck, then it must be a duck. But hey, not to hold grudges, and maybe first impressions in this case are wrong — let’s try starting again.
How do you come to the conclusion that the US geological service is a known shill and arm of the corporate banks and media? Which credible organization and set of facts do you base your “500 years worth” of oil left on?
GregT on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 8:12 pm
“This is coming from a humble deckhand in the oil fields of Texas, I know all this stuff from firsthand sources with close connections to the oil industry.”
Reminds me of a ‘discussion’ I had last fall with the brother in law. Two months before he lost his 27 year long career in the oil and gas industry. He’s now in the process of selling his house (at a loss) to pay for all of his toys that he bought on credit. Let’s just call it a rude awakening.
rockman on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 8:31 pm
Rusty – I’ll be glad to consider any other sources that offer 160X as much as the USGS. Just post and I’ll review.
rockman on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 8:47 pm
You chaps that took those intro geology course are lucky – you dodged the bullet. That’s how I got sucked in. Growing up in rockless New Orleans my freshman geology Prof made it sound very cool. I was called in the geology dept before the start of soph year and was asked why I picked the Earth Science major: did I have family in the oil patch? Did I think there was a career to be had ( no one was hiring geologists in 1970). I said no so they figured I was dumb enough to be a geologist and they welcomed me aboard. Most of the profs had been laid off in the early 60’s bust, got Ph.D. and taught school because there were few other options.
Thank Dog for Iranians and PO. By the time I got out of grad school at Texas A&M the boom was starting. And then there was the bust…then the next boom… and then the next bust …and then the current boom.
My career as a marine would have been much more stable: never a lack of opportunities for the US gov’t to have a military adventure somewhere. Job security for sure. LOL.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 8:57 pm
Ah, good ol’ Texas A&M!! I spent my senior year in high school in the bustling metropolis of Hearne, TX and when we wanted a good time, it was always to be found in College Station — until our favorite hangout burned down one day. I used to root for the Aggies football and basketball teams, saw quite a few of them.
I think you made a good choice, rockman. A stable career of doing pushups and blowing away “bad guys” would have been boring compared to all the things you’ve been through as a geologist, don’t you think?
P.S. During my 4-year stint in the U.S. Navy I was a Hospital Corpsman assigned with the Marines in El Toro on the search and rescue helicopter team. The Marines are a tough bunch of characters, that’s a fact, but probably not the brightest bunch to be honest.
Nony on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 11:03 pm
I had a Marine buddy who was smart. For a Marine. 😉
J-Gav on Fri, 7th Feb 2014 11:26 pm
Davy – Thanks for bringing up ‘backwardation.’ If anyone cares to look it up and see what it’s doing these days they’ll get a little better grasp of how f’ed up things really are. And you’re also correct to say there’s no possibility today for price discovery or ‘true value.’ Every market that counts is rigged and has been for a good long while. Where we are? Well, as the saying goes: Most people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
mo on Sat, 8th Feb 2014 12:05 am
Lots of name calling here. Maybe we should just agree to disagree and get on with the debate!
Nony on Sat, 8th Feb 2014 12:20 am
If you think the price is rigged, buy a put or a call and make some easy money. Rockman is much cagier and says he just doesn’t know the future price.
BTW, it’s practically grassy knoll conspiracy theory stuff to say that the oil futures market is rigged. That thing is very highly traded and very prominent. When someone manipulates a stock, they pick a penny stock, not the DJIA.
Citing the few examples of manipulation to try to indict efficient markets hypothesis is just silly. Like Dunning Kruger land.
mo on Sat, 8th Feb 2014 1:27 am
What is Dunning Kruger land
RICHARD RALPH ROEHL on Sat, 8th Feb 2014 1:59 am
Too much or too little too burn is a moot point.
Any additional consumption level of fossil fuels will increase the heat index of the planet’s biosphere to accelerate a runaway green house effect that is now IRREVERSIBLE.
As stated previously in this forum:
Quote: “Old Coyote Knose… that the United States of Perpetual War Profiteering will not exist by 2050-2060. And the rest of humanity will be perched at the edge of EXTINCTION by the end of the 21st century.”
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sat, 8th Feb 2014 3:50 pm
Damn Noony someone pulled the wool over your eyes. Max Keiser is a good sources, Zero Hedge, and right here on this blog will change that perception. Check out Tim Murphy’s article on the Oil Market from the Oil drum. You can bash these sources if you like very convincing to me
Nony on Sun, 9th Feb 2014 7:08 am
Zero Hedge has some good things to say at times. Not into the market timing conspiracy stuff. But I agree with the general take on moral hazard, bailouts, PIIGs, etc.
I don’t know the rest, but again, if you are so sure the futures are rigged than take a bet.
BTW, some of these pessimist views are not consistent. Kind of hard to say both that 75 is crazy (AND RIGGED) low and we will be at 150 in 5 years, while also saying don’t buy the Bakken since oil prices may crash.