newman1979 wrote:quote="sos"]"Fuzzy" being the understatement of the year, but kudo's for someone else noticing the obvious.
I don't think that "wild decline" have been relied upon by most observers.
[/quote]
That would depend on someone's version of wild. The US has been declining for decades around 1.5%/year. Mexico, during 2 prior peak oils, declined even less. Even with Canteral after its most recent peak its running about 3.5% year. So yes, people were assuming "wild" declines more often than not. Some still ARE.
newman1979 wrote:Seriously, a small decline puts pressure on a growing or flat demand as pricing is always at the margin. We saw that occur in 2008. At present, a recession has changed the demand/ supply situation.
Previously, ZERO allowance was made for demand destruction, because gasoline consumption is so inelastic, doncha know. ZERO allowance was made for a recession actually changing the supply/demand picture enough to effect price.
newman1979 wrote:We will always have some oil, the question is the price.
Peak oil has always been about only supply, the invention of it becoming a price argument is a relatively recent invention, more prevalent over the past decade, but in the resource depletion game going back more than a century related to oil, just a new concept. And certainly not the main component of peak oil.
newman1979 wrote:Mexico's crude oil production is falling pretty fast as is Norway, The UK and the North Sea according to EIA data. History shows that these fields slow slowly at first and then speed up. This has happened to the US in the1970-75 time period. History also shows that exports by producing countries fall faster than production declines.
Maybe. Maybe not. This is all dependent on whether or not any area in particular is experiencing THE peak versus just another one in its history. Mexico has had 3 in the modern era. Its probably capable of having another. And if demand is falling faster than supply is declining, its still an oversupply situation, and price will also reflect it.
newman1979 wrote:The facts are the facts, we deal with them. The issue is how do we we plan for the future, and what should we do now to protect the future.
Protect it from what? Proclaimations of Doom stretching back into the late 1800's which haven't been right yet, and certainly aren't playing out as predicted now 4 YEARS POST PEAK IF THE TITLE IS TO BE BELIEVED?