ROCKMAN wrote:d - "...from 13% to 33% (approximate 150% increase) in 4 years". A minor point but that's about a 250% increase.
westexas wrote:Following is an excerpt from an OpEd that Lynch wrote in August, 2009, where he predicted that oil prices would soon be back down to close to $30. Note that Brent averaged $80 in 2010 and $110 for 2011 to 2013 inclusive–for a four year average price in excess of $100 for 2010 to 2013 inclusive.
Based on Lynch’s track record and based on his current revised forecast for a $50 to $60 price (about twice his previous prediction), I suppose that we should expect an average Brent price of about $150 to $180 for 2016 to 2019 inclusive.
'Peak Oil’ Is a Waste of Energy
By MICHAEL LYNCH
Published: August 24, 2009“Oil remains abundant, and the price will likely come down closer to the historical level of $30 a barrel as new supplies come forward in the deep waters off West Africa and Latin America, in East Africa, and perhaps in the Bakken oil shale fields of Montana and North Dakota. But that may not keep the Chicken Littles from convincing policymakers in Washington and elsewhere that oil, being finite, must increase in price.”
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/opinion/25lynch.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&emc=eta1
an average Brent price of about $150 to $180 for 2016 to 2019 inclusive.
Cog wrote:But according to the ETP peak oil doomers, the price of oil can never rise, but only go down to zero. Pstarr told me this himself not long ago.
pstarr wrote:The idiot was right regarding Bakken, for a few precious years. But the rest, deep water and Arctic were/are a complete bust. So much for the $million dollar con man.
pstarr wrote:Here you go, a piece of b@llshit propaganda from that oil-company trash Lynch Peak Oil’ Is a Waste of EnergyOil remains abundant, and the price will likely come down closer to the historical level of $30 a barrel as new supplies come forward in the deep waters off West Africa and Latin America, in East Africa, and perhaps in the Bakken oil shale fields of Montana and North Dakota. But that may not keep the Chicken Littles from convincing policymakers in Washington and elsewhere that oil, being finite, must increase in price.
dolanbaker wrote:an average Brent price of about $150 to $180 for 2016 to 2019 inclusive.
Well, we're at the end of 2016, 2017-9 are still to come, 180USD for Brent is still a real possibility at the end of 2019 if quotas are held and the economy booms well enough to cause a supply shortfall in 2018, the average price being up there looks quite unlikely now.
pstarr wrote:AdamB wrote:pstarr wrote:The idiot was right regarding Bakken, for a few precious years. But the rest, deep water and Arctic were/are a complete bust. So much for the $million dollar con man.
I've spoke with him twice this year, and he didn't seem like a con man. What about discussing these issues with him makes you think otherwise?
Lynch is a narcissist like you.
pstarr wrote:Attention starved con man for the industry. But at least that loser was paid.
Adam, you need to show us your paycheck. Otherwise you are just another poser.
ROCKMAN wrote:Starman - The DW GOM is a bust? So the definition of a bust, based on the EIA stats, is now defined as 3,400+ wells in 210+ fields that have produced a cumuilative 7 BILLION bbls of oil and is still producing about 400 million bbls of oil. Makes me wonder what a success would look like.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests