Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on July 29, 2019

Bookmark and Share

Will We Really See An Oil Glut In 2020?

Production

There has been much talk lately about a potential oil glut in 2020, most notably by the IEA in their latest monthly oil report, but such predictions are predicated on two faulty assumptions, first being global oil demand estimates are accurate, and the second, strong US shale supply growth will continue unabated regardless of prevailing oil prices.

2020 Balances

A quick analysis of the IEA latest 2020 demand-supply balance indicate a potential 900,000 barrels daily surplus, if true, such a surplus is bound to weigh heavily on prices. Diving deeper into the numbers we notice that IEA expects global oil demand to average 101.7M barrels next year against a potential 102.6M barrels in global supply (should OPEC maintain its current 30M barrels in production). Looking at these numbers, right away a problem arises, namely the IEA is notorious for underestimating the actual level of global oil demand. For those familiar with the IEA tables, the IEA reconciles differences between supply and demand under the seemingly innocuous item labelled Miscellaneous to Balance. For the uninitiated this is what it means: When global oil supply and demand are at a given level, the difference between them (they are rarely exactly balanced) should translate either into an increase or decrease in physical oil inventories, but when the difference does not manifest itself in physical stocks, the IEA introduces the difference on paper under the Miscellaneous to Balance item.

(Source: IEA)

The Missing 400M barrels!

In 2018, global oil supply averaged 100.3M barrels per day, while demand (according to the IEA) averaged only 99.1M barrels per day, thus actual traceable oil inventories should have increased by 1.2M barrels per day, or 438M barrels increase for the year. However, since these excess barrels did not show in the OECD commercial or governmental stocks, the IEA classified the missing 1.2M barrels under the Miscellaneous to Balance. It is of course possible that some of these missing barrels will be located later, and some may have ended in non-OECD inventories, but the likelihood that the totality of the 400M barrels imbalance is stored somewhere is highly unlikely.

(Source: IEA)

As can be seen from the above, actual traceable OECD petroleum stocks increased by mere 18M barrels in 2018 (Q4/17 to Q4./18) as compared to an estimated increase of 438M barrels increase. In Q4/18 alone the IEA balances signalled a 2.3M barrels daily imbalance between supply and demand (210M barrels excess for the quarter) yet the actual reported increase in OECD inventories in Q4/18 is only 5M barrels. Such discrepancy between actual stocks and projected stocks is not new, eventually the lion share of the missing barrels is captured as missed demand in developing countries. In 2017, the WSJ calculated the average upward oil demand revision by the IEA at 880,000 barrels per year over the prior seven years.

(Source: Goehring & Rozencwajg)

Considering the substantial 400M+ barrels gap between reported and actual inventories in 2018, base global oil demand last year (and by extension this year) will likely be revised materially higher in the coming months. An eventual 600,000 barrel upward revision to global demand (which will still leave us with over 200M barrels missing) would reduce the expected 2020 oil-demand imbalance by two thirds from 900,000 barrels per day to only 300,000 barrels per day.

Surging US Shale Growth

In its latest OMR, the IEA revised 2019 non-OPEC oil supply growth slightly higher to 2M barrels (from 1.9M the month prior) mostly due to an upward revision for US and UK supply. Meanwhile, 2020 non-OPEC supply was revised down to 2.1M (from 2.3M) largely due to downward revisions for Russia and Oman following the July OPEC+ deal. For both 2019 and 2020, US supply growth dominates non-OPEC supply growth, with US supply representing 90% of 2019 non-OPEC supply growth and 65% of the 2020 total.

(Source: IEA)

This rosy picture of US supply growth, most of which tied to strong growth in US shale basins, stands at a stark contrast to the recent slew of warnings by the major O&G service providers following the release of their Q2 results:

John Lindsay, CEO of Helmerich & Payne:

“Our expectation of seeing the bottom of the Company’s rig count during the quarter turned out to be premature as the full effect of the industry’s emphasis on disciplined capital spending continues to reverberate through the oil field services sector. As such, H&P exited the quarter in the U.S. with 214 active rigs, which was slightly below the low end of our guidance range. We are reluctant to predict another bottom and see further softening during our fourth fiscal quarter as our guidance would indicate.

Andy Hendricks, CEO of Patterson-UTI:

“E&P companies are being extra vigilant this year in monitoring their spend due to commodity price volatility and the increased focus on spending within their budgets. We believe E&P companies are slowing drilling and completion activity to smooth their spending run rate and reduce the risk of budget exhaustion later in the year.  Our rig count, which averaged 158 rigs during the second quarter, is expected to average 142 rigs during the third quarter.”

Pall Kibsgaard, CEO of Schlumberger:

“The cash flow focus amongst the E&P operators confirms our expectations of a 10% decline in North America land investments in 2019 … We continue to see US shale oil as the only near- to medium-term source of global production growth, albeit at a slowing growth rate, as E&P operators continue to transition from an emphasis on growth to a focus on cash and returns, with consequent restraining effects on investment levels.”  

Jeff Miller, CEO of Halliburton:

“I believe that our customers’ activity cadence for the rest of the year will be dictated by their focus on remaining within their announced CapEx budgets and generating free cash flow. Some will slow down as they’ve been very efficient and will scale back completion programs for the rest of the year to stay within their CapEx guidance. Others may drop rigs, but will continue working down their docks. Majors will most likely continue executing their growth plans in the U.S. shale to meet their longer term objectives. As a result of these different customer behaviors, we expect that activity in North America will be slightly down in the third quarter.”

It’s worth noting that Halliburton has cut its North American workforce by 8% and idled a large number of rigs and fracking equipment as a result of the slowdown in North American drilling and fracking activity.

Core Laboratories, Q2 earnings press release:

“The average third quarter 2019 U.S. rig count is projected to be down. While operators continue to focus on generating FCF and returns on investmentAs a result, Core projects U.S. onshore completion activity to be flat sequentially.” 

Such warnings by O&G service providers should be viewed as an early warning system as to the future trajectory of US shale supply. Back in 2015, a similar wave of warnings (such as this and this) by US O&G service providers preceded a marked decline in US shale production growth the following year.

Beside O&G service providers slowdown warnings, the slowdown in US shale activity is clearly apparent in the 13% decline in the US rig count between December 2018 (1083 rigs) and today (946 rigs). Excluding natural gas focused rigs, the decline in the US oil rig count since the November 2018 peak stands at 112 rigs (888 rigs to 776 rigs).

(Source: Semper Augustus Capital, Baker Hughes)

On July 26th, upon analysing O&G service providers Q2 results, Altacorp, issued the following projection for the US rig count:

“The management teams guided to a reduction in rig count in the coming months, and we understand that E&Ps have been advising drilling contractors that they will be laying down rigs to stay within their budgets. It now appears that the US land rig count – after averaging around 960 in Q2/19 – may average around 880 in Q3/19 and around 860 by Q4/19.”

If Altacorp’s projection is accurate, the YoY decline in the US rig count by Q4/19 will stand at 20% or an  approximate decline of 220 rigs in one year.

Historically, some of the decline (or at times the totality of the decline in the rig count) has been countered by an improvement in rig productivity, but even on that metric US production is set to disappoint with oil rig productivity improving by only 5.5% between November 2018 and July 2019, against a 13% decline in the oil rig count during the same period. As a matter of fact, US oil rig productivity in the three key US shale basins (Permian, Bakken and Eagle Ford) has hardly changed since mid-2018. Without a pickup in productivity, a 20% decline in the rig count by Q4, could translate into a potential flattening, if not an outright decline, in US shale production in 2020.

(Source: Semper Augustus Capital, EIA)

The vocal activity warnings by O&G service providers, the steady decline in the US rig count, and the flattening in US rig productivity does not argue for a material increase in US oil production. Between 2019 and 2020, the IEA projects US liquids supply to increase by a cumulative 3.1M barrels, if this increase was to slow by a mere 20% to 2.5M barrels as result of the slow down in drilling and fracking activity, the global oil supply balance in 2020 would dip into a 300K deficit (assuming a 600K Miscellaneous to Balance adjustment), and this is without factoring recent reductions in expected output by other non-OPEC producers such as Brazil which constitute a key component of the IEA 2020 non-OPEC supply projections.

Conclusion

The IEA chronic underestimation of global oil demand combined with the market erroneous belief in the unshakable resilience of US supply growth, is painting an overly bearish picture of the global oil demand-balance in 2020. As I have argued in the past (The New Oil Order) US shale has introduced a new dynamic oil market balancing force that official agencies (such as the IEA) are still struggling to properly account for in their projections. Historically, the IEA has struggled with capturing the exact level of global oil demand, understandably so, considering the vast scope of the oil market. Supply, on the other hand, was easier to project due to the concentrated nature of oil production in few OPEC countries and a handful of non-OPEC mega projects, but with the advent of shale, projecting global oil supply has become a challenging task as well. Consequently, when agencies such as the IEA are unable to properly track global demand and are unable to account for fast changes in US shale supply, one has to take their 2020 oil glut predictions with a grain of salt.

By Nawar Alsaadi for Oilprice.com



28 Comments on "Will We Really See An Oil Glut In 2020?"

  1. ANAL REAPER on Tue, 30th Jul 2019 7:13 am 

    The only glut we will see is in my pants. Going deeeeep into AOC’s butthole.

    Fucking bitch.

    Go back to bar tending you used up filthy stupid whore.

  2. Robert Inget on Tue, 30th Jul 2019 1:12 pm 

    “Anal Reaper” seems to be sexually attracted to powerful, articulate, hard working, young women.
    We have that in common.

    Why should anyone take seriously someone calling HIMself
    “Anal anything?” Is it because ‘asshole’ has already been taken?

    On topic;
    Question, will we see an oil gult in four or five months?

    Will a devastating ME war intervene in that prediction?
    Will Venezuela suddenly begin producing more oil than it uses?
    Will Mexico stop importing crude and natural gas to cover it’s deficits.
    Will an expanding Nigerian Civil War stifle exports?
    Will Iran be able ro export crude freely?
    Will the UN stop the killing in Chad, Sudan, Libya?
    Will US shale ever show profits @ $55 WTI.

    Have all energy investors lost their minds along with money?
    President Trump simply cannot defend low gasoline prices
    and at the same time send Saudi Arabia enough material to
    blow up the entire region.

  3. Duncan Idaho on Tue, 30th Jul 2019 1:18 pm 

    Will Venezuela suddenly begin producing more oil than it uses?

    The Fat Boy and the psychopaths haven’t been able to stop that one—
    They are sitting on the largest reserves on Earth, and the greedy psychos can’t get their slimy hands on it.
    The Fat Boy and the ilk are getting nervous.

  4. Robert Inget on Tue, 30th Jul 2019 1:49 pm 

    https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Iran-Russia-Plan-Joint-Military-Drills-In-Strait-Of-Hormuz.html

    Iran/Russia, as one expects, are planning a confrontational
    exercise, (show of force) in (or on) the Hormuz)

    IMO, this in itself won’t start WW/3. Everyone involved will be extra careful not to add insult counter parties.

    The actual starting event will be entirely unplanned.
    Even accidental, as it were.

    The trick then will be containment.
    Everyone concerned have more to lose, than gain.

  5. Robert Inget on Tue, 30th Jul 2019 2:16 pm 

    Duncan, It’s taken this long for the world to understand, W/O
    Venezuelan crude there simply CANNOT be a evenly supplied market.
    Several events have forestalled the inevitable.

    1) Trump’s Tariff War on the Economy regretfully slowing growth in the US and China.\

    2) Brexit is most disturbing to Europe’s financial future.
    Without certainy big banks, companies are at a loss where to invest. A cheap pound stifles imports the same way Canadians
    are hampered , (punished) buying US exports.

    3) The shale fiasco surly must be the biggest obstacle to evenly distributed resources and future investment.
    Almost No One is admitting, ‘when it’s gone, it’s gone’ Exporting our future in an useless to effort to service debt.

    Unless we devalue the dollar, avoid a world war, debt will exceed the entire US GDP.
    Once we default, try to understand, living like an Italian or Greek isn’t the worst fate.

    4) Foreseen, not unexpected, by scientists but denied in the US Senate and Presidency, so called ‘natural disasters’ are soaking up cash once earmarked for ‘infrastructure’.
    Allowing our infrastructure to decay admits to any observer,
    we are simply ‘giving up’. From here on out we will be fighting a losing battle reactionarlly. Certainly not preemptively.

  6. peakyeast on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 4:49 am 

    There could easily be an oil glut in 2020…

    The next big recession depression is building up – and according to many analysts it will make 2008 look small because the levels of debt now are much higher.

  7. Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 6:02 am 

    “North China Plain threatened by deadly heatwaves due to climate change and irrigation”
    https://tinyurl.com/y3ah5tqv nature

    “North China Plain is the heartland of modern China. This fertile plain has experienced vast expansion of irrigated agriculture which cools surface temperature and moistens surface air, but boosts integrated measures of temperature and humidity, and hence enhances intensity of heatwaves. Here, we project based on an ensemble of high-resolution regional climate model simulations that climate change would add significantly to the anthropogenic effects of irrigation, increasing the risk from heatwaves in this region. Under the business-as-usual scenario of greenhouse gas emissions, North China Plain is likely to experience deadly heatwaves with wet-bulb temperature exceeding the threshold defining what Chinese farmers may tolerate while working outdoors”

  8. Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 6:03 am 

    “HISTORICAL DISTRIBUTION OF MAXIMUM WET-BULB TEMPERATURE”
    https://tinyurl.com/y25r2ctc science advances

    “future TWmax around the Persian/Arabian Gulf region is likely to exceed the TW threshold for human survivability by the end of the century under a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario of atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations. In summer 2015, TW in the Bandar Mahshahr, Iran Persian/Arabian Gulf, reached nearly 35°C, suggesting that the threshold may be breached sooner than projected (7). In this study, we shift our attention to the region of South Asia, here defined as Pakistan, Nepal, India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. The northern part of this region is the second hottest after southwest Asia but is more expansive when considering the land area affected.”

    “On the basis of the simulation results, TWmax is projected to exceed the survivability threshold at a few locations in the Chota Nagpur Plateau, northeastern India, and Bangladesh and projected to approach the 35°C threshold under the RCP8.5 scenario by the end of the century over most of South Asia, including the Ganges river valley, northeastern India, Bangladesh, the eastern coast of India, Chota Nagpur Plateau, northern Sri Lanka, and the Indus valley of Pakistan (Fig. 2). Under the RCP4.5 scenario, no regions are projected to exceed 35°C; however, vast regions of South Asia are projected to experience episodes exceeding 31°C, which is considered extremely dangerous for most humans”

    “The fertile valleys of the Indus and the Ganges, where human population is currently in the hundreds of millions, will likely experience some of the most severe projected hazard from heat waves. Three independent mechanisms are offered to explain this projection. First, the monsoon system transports warm and humid air masses into the Indus and Ganges valleys from the surrounding warm Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal. Second, surface elevations in these valleys are generally lower than 100 m above sea level, and hence, surface air is generally warmer than surrounding higher-elevation areas. Third, much of the valleys are irrigated, which tends to enhance TW over irrigated areas because of modifications in the surface energy balance (29). These three factors add together to favor higher TW conditions in the valleys compared to the surrounding regions.”

  9. Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 6:10 am 

    “Unprecedented” Arctic Wildfires Visible From Space As ‘Global Cooling’ Looms”
    https://tinyurl.com/y2l8u93g zero hedge

    “for those terrified by this event as a climactic climate change indicator, Armstrong Economics’ Martin Armstrong has something potentially more worrisome…One of the serious correlations we see is that the next solar cycle of 11 years may be the lowest in at least 200 years on our model, which calls for the low in a wave of 224 years to be precise. Our forecast for this next solar cycle of activity, which rises and falls in an 11-year cycle, is indeed in a bearish trend but it correlates with the ECM – which is rare. If our computer is correct, then the next solar cycle should be at least one-third less solar activity and it could rise to a panic type of decline of 50% as measured in terms of sunspots. This analysis warns that the next cycle will start in 2020 and reach its maximum in 2025. This further warns not of global warming, but highly volatile weather and crop failures as we hit both extremes. The next two solar cycles will be the risk of violent weather and global cooling.”

  10. Sissyfuss on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 8:28 am 

    Davy, Armstrong Economics is a climate denier of the first magnitude. They’re currently marketing the Maunder Minimum and other sun related phenomenon to keep their customers cool and ready to deal. They have zero credibility among any persons immersed in the climate science. Unfortunately, that is a small number of individuals.

  11. Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 8:34 am 

    I personally see the suns cycles making the situation worse with greater instability. When the sun cycles do return to warmer earth conditions then the warming will be that much more pronounced and abrupt.

  12. Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:32 am 

    Don’t forget Sis. Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. I happen to agree with Armstrong Economics on this one. I could care less if they have zero credibility, or that the info came from zero hedge. Science be damned.

  13. JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:35 am 

    Don’t forget Sis I am an asshole with no particular opinion. I just want to disrupt the forum because I can and this means any activity that achieves my nihilistic desires. I want to take this forum down. Everybody know this but me. I happen to agree with Armstrong Economics on this one. I could care less if they have zero credibility, or that the info came from zero hedge. Science be damned.

  14. Not Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:36 am 

    Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:32 am

  15. Davy on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:37 am 

    IMA, WTF any of my above posts have to do with the discussion of a potential oil glut in 2020, I have no freakin idea.

  16. JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:39 am 

    Secret McCabe Texts With MI-5 Counterpart Emerge, Spotlighting UK’s Early Role In ‘Russiagate’
    Newly surfaced text messages between Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and his counterpart at MI-5, the UK’s domestic security service, have cast new light on Britain’s role in the FBI’s 2016 ‘Russiagate’ investigation, according to The Guardian. Two of the most senior intelligence officials in the US and UK privately shared concerns about “our strange situation” as the FBI launched its 2016 investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign was colluding with Russia, the Guardian has learned. Text messages between Andrew McCabe, the deputy director of the FBI at the time, and Jeremy Fleming, his then counterpart at MI5, now the head of GCHQ, also reveal their mutual surprise at the result of the EU referendum, which some US officials regarded as a “wake-up call”, according to a person familiar with the matter. -The Guardian McCabe and Flemming’s texts were “infrequent and cryptic,” but “occurred with some regularity” after the June 2016 Brexit referendum. In his text message about the August 2016 meeting, Fleming appeared to be making a reference to Peter Strzok, a senior FBI official who travelled to London that month to meet the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer. Downer had agreed to speak with the FBI about a Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, who had told him that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee in the race. -The Guardian In 2017, The Guardian reported that Britain’s spy agencies had played a key role in alerting their American counterparts of communications between members of the Trump campaign and “suspected Russian agents,” which was passed along to the US in what was characterized as a “routine exchange of information.” UK begged Trump not to declassify In May, President Trump issued a sweeping declassification order on materials related to the DOJ/FBI Russia investigation – leaving it in the hands of Attorney General William Barr to determine exactly what happened to Trump and his campaign before and after the 2016 US election. “For over a year, people have asked me to declassify. What I’ve done is declassified everything,” said Trump, adding “He can look and I hope he looks at the UK and I hope he looks at Australia and I hope he looks at Ukraine.” “It’s the greatest hoax probably in the history of our country and somebody has to get to the bottom of it. We’ll see. For a long period of time, they wanted me to declassify and I did.” Meanwhile, also in May, Fox News reported that the discredited “Steele Dossier” – assembled by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele – was referred to as “crown material” in an email exchange suggesting that former FBI Director James Comey insisted that CIA Director John Brennan pushed for the inclusion of the dossier in the intelligence community assessment (ICA) on Russian interference. Moreover, much of “Operation Crossfire Hurricane” – the FBI’s official investigation into the Trump campaign – occurred on UK soil, which is perhaps why the New York Times reported last September that the UK begged Trump not to declassify ‘Russiagate’ documents ‘without redaction.’ Let’s also not forget that shortly after Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos announced his intention to work for the campaign, he was lured to London in March, 2016, where Maltese professor and self-described Clinton foundation member Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer. We wonder what else McCabe’s texts with his MI-5 counterpart will reveal?

  17. JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:40 am 

    oops, I forgot to put the link:
    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/google-summit-celebrities-climate-change

  18. JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:40 am 

    IMA, WTF any of my above posts have to do with the discussion of a potential oil glut in 2020, I have no freakin idea.

  19. More Davy Identity Theft on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:42 am 

    JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:35 am

    JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:39 am

    JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:40 am

  20. More Davy Identity Theft and Projections on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:43 am 

    JuanP on Wed, 31st Jul 2019 9:40 am

    “IMA, WTF any of my above posts have to do with the discussion of a potential oil glut in 2020, I have no freakin idea”

  21. Robert Inget on Thu, 1st Aug 2019 11:02 am 

    US Shale companies being slaughtered in the markets.
    Exits, far too narrow. This is happening today.
    Many smaller shale centric companies going under.
    Larger ones will be taken out by majors with upstream
    (pipelines, retail) positions.

    Why? Artificially low oil prices based on one salient fact.
    Shale ain’t making money at $55 oil.
    So, to force liquidation, evey effort is being made to hold the line on POO till new drilling drops off to near zero.

    Add the facts that investing in oil itself, now considered evil.
    Even proTrump, AGW Denier Suckers are getting scarce.

    Why low oil prices can’t last is an entirely diferent tale.

    It’s been circular firing squad shale that has been killing itself
    off with promices it can’t possibly keep.

    Above is all about OIL.. Not Gas.
    Gas is so plentiful some, drillers are giving it away free.
    (there are anti flaring regs)

    In fact gas prices are at their lowest in decades.

    If you have the stomach to invest in energy, look at pipelines.

  22. Robert Inget on Thu, 1st Aug 2019 2:06 pm 

    What should be a positive for oil pricing turned into quicksand for several shale ‘players’.

    (Bloomberg) — Whiting Petroleum Corp. plunged 35% for its biggest-ever drop after the oil explorer fired one-third of its workforce, scaled back its full-year production target and posted a surprise quarterly loss.

    The Denver-based oil explorer’s decline extended the 12-month loss to 74%. Fellow shale explorer Concho Resources Inc. also was hammered by investors, losing 23% of its market value, after disclosing botched results from an experimental drilling project. Pioneer Natural Resources Corp., Diamondback Energy Inc. and Cimarex Energy Inc. also fell.

    For Whiting, the elimination of 254 jobs will result in $50 million in annual cost savings, according to figures released on Wednesday.

    “We aim to be as efficient as possible and that is why we made the difficult decision to reduce our workforce in order to realize significant annualized cost savings,” Chief Executive Officer Brad Holly said in a statement Wednesday.

    Whiting joins industry peers Pioneer Natural, Laredo Petroleum Inc. and Devon Energy Corp. in cutting headcount as investors increasingly focus on general and administrative budgets.

    At many oil producers, executive compensation can amount to as much as 20% of general and administrative costs, Evan Lederman, a partner at New York-based Fir Tree Partners, said in an interview earlier this year. The Whiting job cuts included 94 executive and corporate-level positions.

    The fact that shale is crapping out sooner than expected should be bullish for POO.

    Not so.

    http://www.livecharts.co.uk/MarketCharts/crude

    Time to buy?

    Is there enough blood in the street?

    I’ll wait till Friday PM.

  23. Duncan Idaho on Thu, 1st Aug 2019 2:16 pm 

    I’ll wait till Friday PM.
    We shall see, I’ve been tempted.

  24. Robert Inget on Thu, 1st Aug 2019 2:24 pm 

    Oh if shale can’t hack it @ $55, it sure can’t @ $50 or worse.

    There are simply to few Canadian pipelines to resupply US crude requirements…
    (Even in a depression)

    John Bolton seems determined to take America
    to Hell.

    “President Trump has said he does not want war with Iran, but that his main objective is to prevent Tehran from getting a nuclear weapon. On the advice of National Security Advisor John Bolton, the administration has pursued that goal using “maximum pressure,” a tactic which thus far has consistently failed. Bolton’s preferred strategy has pushed Iran closer to the bomb, incentivized menacing behavior, and increased the chance of war. If we are to check this deteriorating situation before it’s too late, a new, realistic strategy is necessary now”.

    War with Iran, Russia and Iraq will destroy the ME including Israel, Iran, UAE, and Saudi Arabia.

    America may not recover economically, for decades.

    Bolton must know where bodies are hidden.

    Good luck

  25. Duncan Idaho on Thu, 1st Aug 2019 2:31 pm 

    War with Iran, Russia and Iraq will destroy the ME including Israel, Iran, UAE, and Saudi Arabia.

    America may not recover economically, for decades.
    Current economic system will be far in the rear view mirror.
    Even the Fat Boy has been clued in on this.
    His 6 bankruptcies still come up occasionally, I ‘m sure.

    One good thing about being “President”– the US can’t go bankrupt.

  26. makati1 on Thu, 1st Aug 2019 6:47 pm 

    Duncan, the US will never recover after the next crash and I do not think it will take a war in the ME to do so. A few more years of devaluing the dollar, and attacking all of its competition with economic warfare, will isolate the US and end the dollar’s reign.

    I see a bloody civil war and, possibly, the division of the US into several countries. Americans cannot handle a huge drop in their lifestyles and comforts. To drop to the level of most of the rest of the world (<$10,000 per capita) would be a nightmare.

    I could be wrong. Maybe they will wake up and clean house in DC, but I do not believe in miracles. Do you?

  27. Robert Inget on Fri, 2nd Aug 2019 11:02 am 

    U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday he is considering a quarantine or blockade of Venezuela, as the United States steps up pressure on President Nicolas Maduro to relinquish power.

    Asked by a reporter whether he was considering such a measure given the amount of involvement by China and Iran in Venezuela, Trump said: “Yes, I am.” CNBC

    (A blockade, BTW, is an act of war)
    Some mix up ’embargo’ with ‘blockade’.
    (already a reality).
    Reread that last short paragraph.

    ANY OTHER president uttering these fateful words, (threatening war with Venezuela, Iran, China, Russia over oil)
    would make major headlines.

    One way for John Bolton to trick Stupido into a major war, talk him into blockading Venezuelan exports.
    (one major fly in Bolton’s soup)
    Trump takes marching orders from Putin, not John Bolton.

    Russia (and China) will simply ignore any blockade.
    Unless US military attempt to board an exporting /importing
    vessel or aircraft or truck, all will be good.

  28. Pat on Sat, 3rd Aug 2019 4:17 am 

    “To drop to the level of most of the rest of the world (<$10,000 per capita) would be a nightmare."already dollar loosing it's global reserve. The america economy is collapsing fast to 10 trillion. "the division of the US into several countries." See real possible. Prepare stock up, grow own food global depression coming, oil age nears end, only for global recession oil has not seen $500.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *