[BigTex]

Anyone buy any USO today?

I bought a little under $35.

As long as we are under the production cost of many non-OPEC projects, I don't know how long we can stay in this price range.

Even though OPEC's production costs are much lower, I think that the amount of money they need per barrel to stay in power might as well be their production costs.

This is an exceptionally strange time. Gold is surging and oil has collapsed. I'm certain no one would have believed we would be here six months ago.

Production cost is what I keep thinking about. I can see us going to $25 per barrel, but I think we will stay there about as long as we stayed above $145.

I may be wrong about current prices being cheap, but buying USO right now seems like a pretty safe bet if you've got a year or two to wait until the market rights itself.

[patience]

BigTex,

I'm with you. I don't have enough to invest in that sort of thing, so I'm setting up my kids to farm with horses--a cheap venture out here in the sticks. We may not be able to afford to drive, but we WILL eat.

[gnm]

Patience, why not a diesel tractor and oil press (and plant some oil crops) - Don't have to feed it in the winter!

-G

[Tanada]

Patience, why not a diesel tractor and oil press (and plant some oil crops) - Don't have to feed it in the winter!

-G

Worse comes to worst you can eat the horse.

[AirlinePilot]

Anyone buy any USO today?

I bought a little under $35.

As long as we are under the production cost of many non-OPEC projects, I don't know how long we can stay in this price range.

Even though OPEC's production costs are much lower, I think that the amount of money they need per barrel to stay in power might as well be their production costs.

This is an exceptionally strange time. Gold is surging and oil has collapsed. I'm certain no one would have believed we would be here six months ago.

Production cost is what I keep thinking about. I can see us going to $25 per barrel, but I think we will stay there about as long as we stayed above $145.

I may be wrong about current prices being cheap, but buying USO right now seems like a pretty safe bet if you've got a year or two to wait until the market rights itself.

I bought it(USO) a few days ago when it was around 36.
I tend to agree, I have a hard time believing we are going below the 40$ mark for any length of time.

There are far too many things which point to upward pressure right now even with a long term economic slump. If your patient, I think the rewards could be pretty big. Im starting to really think the dollar is done and the FED/Treasury is out of effective ammo. We are all along for the ride and I dont think its going to be a smooth one.

[BigTex]

Declining production

Higher costs for maintaining current production

China growth

Weak dollar

Political instability in many locations (Iraq, Nigeria, Venezuela, Russia, etc.)

You can buy oil today for $40 per barrel. It may be cheaper tomorrow or next week, but I don't think it's going to be $40 or less for an extended period.

Note also that the major oil companies have been trading up for a month or so. That makes me think that others don't think that low prices are here to stay either.

I may be wrong, of course.

[dohboi]

ssm wrote: "But ever more interesting is the fact that as we speak greater demand for alternative energy vehicles has already been put into actual mass production mode."

LOL

I wish what you imply here were right (the actual sentence is incoherent--"demand" can't be put into "production mode" mass or otherwise), but you don't seem to be according to these headlines:


volt plant mothballed

prius plant mothballed

prius demand plummets

"Only a few months ago, manufacturers couldn't build enough hybrids to satisfy demand in the United States. But by November, sales of hybrids had plummeted by 50 percent - even more than the 37 percent drop in overall auto sales in the past year, Autodata Corp. reported. Toyota announced this week that it was indefinitely postponing completion of a Prius assembly plant in Blue Springs, Miss."

Is there some other "alternative energy vehicle" you were thinking of? Or is it your general habit to make claims without any support in fact?

[NoahsDove]

Moonbat is great. 'A great fan of his.


http://www.monbiot.com/

[MonteQuest]

The early 80s decline in consumption can be in part chalked up to fuel switching from petroleum to NG in electrical generation.

Yes, the reduction in US oil use during the 80's came mostly from industry switching fuels and industry efficiency gains. While autos did become more efficient, gasoline consumption actually went up.

[MonteQuest]

With current production estimated at 86.18 million barrels a day, a full 9% in decline is 33.42 days annually.

For the first year. Using the Rule of 70, a 9% decline rate means dropping from 86 mbpd to 43 mbpd in less than 8 years.

[ki11ercane]

"Only a few months ago, manufacturers couldn't build enough hybrids to satisfy demand in the United States. But by November, sales of hybrids had plummeted by 50 percent - even more than the 37 percent drop in overall auto sales in the past year, Autodata Corp. reported. Toyota announced this week that it was indefinitely postponing completion of a Prius assembly plant in Blue Springs, Miss."

Is there some other "alternative energy vehicle" you were thinking of? Or is it your general habit to make claims without any support in fact?

I would presume then the massive waiting lists for Prius' at Toyota dealerships has disappeared. That's a good thing; all these people can now just go on a Saturday afternoon and buy one off the lot without waiting months for it to arrive.

[dohboi]

Here's a nice little interview to share with your family and friends over the holidays:

Head of IEA

[Jotapay]

Sent to everyone I know. It's shocking to see the problem discussed so plainly now in the media. They are starting to get it.

[dohboi]

'Seems also that he did a very good job with pushing Faith from IEA to speak more clearly. He actually made him achnowledge peak oil and suggest a date for it!'

But he couldn't get him to apologize to the PO community. Oh well.

'Although I think 2020 sounds rather optimistic its a new tone from IEA.'

Note that Birol qualified this by saying this is possible with major investment. In the report it is clear that major investment means trillions of dollars. No one thinks they are going to spend that kind of cash, so he is really saying that peak is sometime much, much sooner.

[nobodypanic]

outstanding!

this means that we probably already peaked.

[kublikhan]

While autos did become more efficient, gasoline consumption actually went up.

Not according to the EPA:

Increasing mileage, decreasing oil usage:
Year 1980 1985
mpg 17.0 21.0
oil 17.0 15.7

decreasing mileage, increasing oil usage:
Year 1987 1998 2004
mpg 22.0 20.1 19.3
oil 16.7 18.9 19.7

Sources:
Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975-2008
[url=http://cure.eas.gatech.edu/~chang/eas6135/classnotes/EAS_6135_09.ppt]Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975-2005
[/url] Oil Consumption

Edit:
Just wanted to mention gasoline specifically. Gross gasoline usage was relatively flat in the early 80's when mpg was increasing(if looked at on a per capita basis, it would have actually fallen). It started growing again in the late 80's(when mpg was falling).

[InToWishin]

Peak by 2015? 2020? How about 2007 at the very latests.

Please do not mistake web-board user comments with realistic "peak times" for the Monbiot "in 2020" comments in the video.

Plus therealnews.com is Canadian. WHOIS contains:

Registrant:
The Real News
720 Bathurst St. Suite 301
Toronto, ON M5S 2R4
CA

This is an IEA "you are safe until 2020" snow job.

[dohboi]

Note that Birol said "with adequate investment" when mentioning the 2020 figure. In the report itself, adequate investment is defined as trillions, even tens of trillions of dollars. No one believes that is going to happen, so in effect he is admitting that the peak is much, much earlier (ie. now). This is one point where the otherwise-quite-aggressive Monbiot could have pressed a bit harder for clarification.

But given the track record of this agency, long a denier of PO and long a ridiculer of anyone who talked about it, the date isn't as important as the shift in general tone on the issue.

Before this year, it was the economists that set the projections. The "assumptions" Birol is referring to were that supply would always cover demand! So they would just make a guess at growing world demand and then say that supply would follow it! This was the basis of the sage advice that this influential body was putting out.

Finally this year they had actual geologists go out and do the kind of thorough study that they should have been doing all along. And what they found scared the B'Jez out of them. I'm told that when these geologists go out to talk to insiders in the field, that they are much more stark and dire. The public report and stance is more muted so that they won't be blamed for mass global panic and probably also at the behest of their funders.

[bl00k]

In the report itself,

Forgive me but what report are you referring to? Can you offer a link?

Thanks

[dohboi]

Thanks, cb. Yeah, that one.