Just how much of the pump price of gasoline is attributable to the war in Iraq? A dollar? Three dollars? None. That conversation recently swirled around me and, one one point, someone commented that well over half (or more than $2) of America's $4.10 gallon of gas is due to the war. Another person asked "Is that right?" And, after pulling out some hair from my head, my response was both short and then long.
The short:
Two dollars a gallon is, perhaps, as good a swag as anyone's.
...
I think.
And, the long:
This is really a tough analytical (ANALyst) question, without a pure answer. How much did invading Iraq add to the price of gasoline? It really depends on who the hell you ask, what assumptions are, etc ..
1. For most, the two prime drivers are mounting demand combined with constrained supply (Peak Oil hits ... and the news is NOT GOOD re Peak Oil).
2. There is, from what I can tell, an over exaggeration of the role of speculation; this is profiting off oil prices not driving them.
3. There is, however, a major risk factor in the market due to tensions in the Persian Gulf/etc. (The war, threats to Iran, etc ...)
4. Without Operation Iraqi Freedom and with better relationships with Iran, would there be global investments in Iraq / Iran such that they would be producing more oil for the world market?
5. To what extent is the Iraq War responsible for the devaluation of the dollar over the past five years and the role this has had on oil price increases?
6. And, this question doesn't deal with the most interesting question: What is the true total cost of a gallon of gasoline? Because, when we add in security, infrastructure, health, pollution, lost and damaged lives (LIVES!! cost in blood) and other costs, some analysts put the "price" of a gallon of gasoline well above $10 (and even $15) per gallon. But 'the true cost of gasoline' wasn't the question and conversation ... thus we will leave this aside.
7. To complicate the picture even more, we could ask "what if" questions. What if the United States hadn't committed so much in resources (people's lives, people's time and intellectual/other capacity, money) to the conflict? What might dead, disabled, and wounded Americans, Iraqis, and others have achieved? Would (could?) some portion of that been used to help move the nation (the globe) toward an Energy Smart future? Might we have made steps to Energize America toward a more prosperous, climate friendly society? What were the "opportunity costs" and how do those relate to gas prices at the pump? This is an incredible sensible, but complex, set of questions and issues which we will also leave aside for the moment, even if you can count me intrigued by the 'what if' question.
Let's look around at some of the discussion of the issues related to the Iraq War and gasoline prices.
From the Enegy Information Administration's gasoline price primer:
Crude oil supply and prices – Crude oil prices are determined by worldwide supply and demand. Events in crude oil markets that caused spikes in crude oil prices were a major factor in all but one of the five major run-ups in gasoline prices between 1992 and 1997, according to the National Petroleum Council's study "U.S. Petroleum Supply - Inventory Dynamics." Rapid gasoline price increases occurred in response to crude oil shortages caused by the Arab oil embargo in 1973, the Iranian revolution in 1978, the Iran/Iraq war in 1980, and the Persian Gulf conflict in 1990. The cost of crude oil has been the main contributor to recent increases in gasoline prices. World crude oil prices reached record levels in 2007 due mainly to high worldwide oil demand relative to supply. Other factors contributing to higher crude oil prices include political events and conflicts in some major oil producing regions, as well as other factors such as the declining value of the U.S. dollar (the currency at which crude oil is traded globally).
Okay, for EIA, the prime cause: supply / demand curves, but note "political events and conflicts".
Chris at Daily Liberty Research did a nice post on driving factors of oil prices with an interesting collection of articles, including the late June reporting that "OPEC President Chakib Khelil predicted that the price of oil will climb to $170 a barrel before the end of the year, citing the dollar’s decline and political conflicts…" Chris comes to this key conclusion:
[T]he main reasons for high gas prices are the weak dollar/inflation (aka the Federal Reserve), the current wars we are in, and the likelihood of the U.S. starting more wars in the near future.
National Security Network took a look at the issue as well, with a focus on the risk premium. They comment that "some experts estimate" a risk premium of $30 to $40 barrel due to tensions with Iran/etc. That is what my 'off the top of the head' figure would have been for risk premium. But, guess what: even the best analysts, when pushed away from reporters, seem call this a guess, a swag or, at best, an "educated" or "informed" estimate. And, of course, the risk premium doesn't address the question of whether there would be more oil produced absent the US invasion and occupation of Iraq and sanctions against Iran. Nor does it address the question of how much of dollar's fall is due to conflict in Iraq and tension with Iran.
A version of this discussion appeared at The Oil Drum. And, as always, the comments (okay, most comments there) were thoughtful and (often extremely) well informed. There were (just a few) comments that Iraq was irrelevant to gas prices. Others who focused on supply / demand, with one suggesting that about $1.50 of price premium is increased demand/tight supply with about $0.75 being Iraq. Some who tried to calculate what the market implications would be if Iraq and Iranian oil had been maximized, suggesting a major impact on gasoline prices. And, others who queried some of the 'what if scenarios'.
Many focused on the extent to which Iraq and federal borrowing to pay for it has undermined the US dollar and thus contributed to gasoline price increases. One commenter took the approach of simply attributing 100% of US military operations to the cost of Iraqi oil production, placing it far more expensive per barrel produced than any conceived production project in the world. Another asserted that we sacrificed $0.99 gallon gasoline by the invasion, suggesting $3 increase at the pump. Jeffveil's very thoughtful comment, which rejects the very concept of a risk premium, began/ended this way:
Hmmmm... this is a thorny issue. ... the opportunity cost of the Iraq War may justify some of the price at the pump. Exactly how much? I'll stick with you SWAG.
Back to a swag:
To place a little context, America's gasoline at the pump, on average across the country, has gone up from $1.42 / gallon in January 2003 to $4.10 now. It has gone up $2.68. While there was already some 'risk premium' in place at that time (war drums beating), this suggests some form of upper bound on the discussion -- but an upper bound that is well above $2 per gallon.
These, however, don't clearly answer the questions. Is the Iraq war premium $3?$2.30? $2? A buck? Twenty cents? Or, is there no premium at all? I find a $3 per gallon assertion absurd, just as I would find it absurd to assert that there is no premium at all. But, in terms of defensible analysis, in scratching my head, I return to the short answer:
Two dollars a gallon is, perhaps, as good a swag as anyone's.
...
I think.
But that is why this post is here. To spark a conversation. To be honest, I don't know the answers to these questions. I wonder whether anyone really does. Which is one of the reasons why I'm writing this. I don't know. I am not expert on gasoline prices and all the factors that coalesce to drive prices that are paid at the pump. Many here, however, are ... Are the questions asked above the right ones? Are there major factors missing? And, what might the answers be? What is a 'defensible' statement as to the premium American drivers pay at the pump due to the Iraq War.
Peak Oil
Now, to finish, we must be careful. The Oil Drum published a piece yesterday highlighting that global declines in oil field productivity (core to Peak Oil) seem to be accelerating faster than analysis and reporting had suggested would occur.
The evidence seems to be pointing
to an overall increase in the global decline rate for existing wells. What this means is that, if world production is around 86 million barrels a day, then to replace existing declines next year, an additional new production of 4.47 mbd at 5.2% decline, instead of the 3.87 mbd required at 4.5% decline, will be needed just to stabilize supply at a fixed level.
If things work well, opening up all of Alaska would add perhaps 900,000 barrels per day to the oil supply in a decade or so. Ignoring growing global demand for oil (Chinese 'consumers' wanting cars like America's soccer moms and McSUV fans), we need to be finding and putting on line new oil the equivalent of 5% of current production year in, year out just to stay even. Ten years from now, that theoretical new US oil production would be less than 1/50th of the requirement to fill in that gap. (I don't want to be in the should we, shouldn't we discussion on that but to make it clear, in yet a different way, that those who are advocating "Drill Here! Drill Now! Pay Less!" are, in the politest words possible, deceitful on a level of nearly criminal negligence in terms of America's and the globe's future.) While it is an interesting intellectual discussion to battle over how much Iraq is responsible for today's gasoline prices and a very sad discussion to have about 'what if' George the W had been a thoughtful President and the opportunity costs of not using these resources in a wiser fashion, the key challenge is to figure out and execute paths to get the US and the Globe on a planned (rather than forced) glide slope off oil (and off coal, Global Warming ...). And, to get on this glide slope NOW.
We must Get Energy Smart! NOW!!!
At the pump and elsewhere, we are suffering the consequences for, as a society and individuals, our energy illiteracy and bad energy choices. The consequences are already dire. They will only get worse ... unless we (as individuals, communities, businesses, governments at all levels, nations, global society) get our act together and start acting. WE have a choice ...
Ask yourself: Are you doing your part to ENERGIZE AMERICA?
Are you ready to do your part?
Your voice can ... and will make a difference.
So ... SPEAK UP ... NOW!!!
PS: Energize America has a panel Friday morning, 9 am, at Netroots Nation. Please join Jerome a Paris, Devilstower, Energy Smart candidates Debbie Cook (CA-45) and Mark Begich (AK-Senate), and myself for a conversation about Energizing America: Setting an Agenda for Progress.
Login Here
to an overall increase in the global decline rate for existing wells. What this means is that, if world production is around 86 million barrels a day, then to replace existing declines next year, an additional new production of 4.47 mbd at 5.2% decline, instead of the 3.87 mbd required at 4.5% decline, will be needed just to stabilize supply at a fixed level.
Share This
Spotlight
Anyone want to talk gas prices?
Sadly, if ‘only’ we’d put on, in 2000, a 1 cent per gallon per month tax for funding alternatives and a move off oil, we would be paying far less for gasoline per gallon, far more of that money would be staying in the United States, and, by the way, we’d be using an awful lot less oil.
But, when gasoline was 99 cents/gallon, it would be bad to tax it.
Peak Oil will drive us off oil. The fall off the cliff will not be fun.
Or “if only” St Ronnie of Raygunz hadn’t totally destroyed the Carter administration moves to wean the US off of oil and towards alternative energy sources…
Thanks for the cool graph. I was thinking a simpler more paranoid thought that gas companies were just punishing us for the Prius.
I did love hearing T. Boone Pickens on the local “green” radio station talking up wind and solar power. A “wow” moment, imo.
Thanks for the awesome post.
One of my favorite posters, on the walls for years, was of Ronnie Raygun. Went looking for it on line … no luck. But check this image. Sure reminds me of our current “President”, except that I might laugh with Ronnie (at times) even as I disagreed (vehemently) with him.
One part of this discussion should include the effect of having Big Oil dictate our ‘Energy Policy”.
Ronnie spoke well, though he rarely said anything of note and he had charm. Bush has no charm and certainly can’t speak. Wish repubs would just disappear for a long time.
Dosido … Did you see Picking at Pickens’ Plan Wednesday? Tried to be fair and outline what was good (even great) and weak (even disastrous) within his plan. If I only had $58 million for Energize America, I promise you that I’d be able to get some change underway …
Hugh’s 3 Iron Laws of Energy
1. The price of crude oil and the price of gasoline are not directy coupled.
2. The price of gasoline is always manipulated.
3. The price of crude oil in the short term is excessively high and in the long term absurdly low.
Sort of as a corollary of 3. The major driver in the price of crude since 2004 has been excessive speculation.
If you would like a more detailed explanation of this last, go to my scandals list item 365.
Parenthetically, while the people at the Oil Drum are very good on the technical aspects of oil production and peak oil, they are very weak in understanding the financial side of the crude oil market.
Our energy policy is drill more.
Don’t you think that is just pure spite? The oil companies have leases that they are not using apparently and I think the Bushies are doing this as an “in your face” move.
And if only the Clinton administration had revisited Carters pragmatism on energy issues. (and Mid East policy, but perhaps that is for another thread)
No, I believe it’s a strategic maneuver on the part of the oil companies. The recoverable oil in areas where they hold leases count as corporate assets on their balance sheets. So that oil in the ground is worth a lot of money, if they get rights to drill for it.
And they’ll value it even if they haven’t a real clue how much of it there is.
LAST YEAR, I had to order some parts for a special water pump that they use in the oil industry and was told there was a Fourteen month backlog and that they were drilling and capping wells in Texas as fast as they possibly could!
Hugh — This is very interesting material. I seem to find that your item 365 understates the role of peaking supply and reduced supply of sweet crude. In addition, shouldn’t the ‘paper barrels’ have the largest impact in the out years rather than in near term as actual demand has to be represented in buy/sell/delivery? In any event, very interesting material and interesting list which I neither ready to reject nor embrace … will have to relook and be able to think about. Thank you.
I wish Oil field Guy was here, I’d like his take on this.
I think there is one BIG point missing in this post;
I believe the REAL reason we invaded Iraq was because saddam was making overtures that he would exploit all his reserves, to pay for infrastructure or whatever.
if that is so, then that would have also initiated a supply war, with the saudi’s doing what they could to keep up with saddams production
in other words, I am saying petroleum would have probably gone DOWN in price if not for the war
cheney’s energy policiy was;
“make oil as scarce as possible
I do not necessarily see that prices would have gone down. But, that possibility is represented in the comment that over at TOD one of the commentators posted a thought similar to yours — that invading Iraq lost our opportunity for $0.99 gallon gasoline.
I agree somewhat but recognize that his mis-steps included trying to do too much at once with the failed Health Plan, which combined with the arrogance of the then Dem majorities in congress led to Newt Gingrich and his Contract on America.
After that happened, there was pretty much no way that a Dem president could get good, comprehensive environmental legislation through a hostile House and Senate for the remaining six years of his admin, triangulation notwithstanding.
No I will backtrack to read it. It was interesting to hear an oil guy say the words “solar” and “wind power” with enthusiasm. I’m sure there’s a catch.
Maybe instead of saying “wow” I should have said “wtf?”
going to read…
if saddam really was going to exploit the potential of his reserves, I don’t see how the price couldn’t have gone down, supposedly his reserves is close to saudi arabias
it would take quite a bit of manipulation to both exploit that volume and keep the prices high at the same time
$0.99 per gallon gas hasn’t been a realistic for years, and was a serious disincentive to conservation - Hummers, anyone? I’m thinking that all the sabre-rattling at Iran has accomplished its main goal, driving up the price of oil, and with it the profits of Big Oil and the Mid-East producers (e.g., the Saudis).
The drive off the cliff….
I’m paying $5.50 or so for diesel for my small fleet of trucks and vans.
I’m raising my prices. All my suppliers are raising their prices. A lot more than most of us can afford.
Small trucking companies are going out of business, since the contracts to haul, which they cannot renegotiate, do not cover the cost of fuel and truck payments.
The entire economy runs on diesel and is heading over the cliff of oil prices.
The conversation in industry is about the prospective of $200/barrel oil. My rough figures show that $200 oil equals about $8 diesel. At $8 our economy comes to a screeching halt.
I think we may be looking at some really rough times just around the corner…
i don’t see how you can completely separate peak oil, demand growth and risk factors from a speculation induced bubble. isn’t the speculation initially about the risk & magnitude of the affects of those first three real factors - and that bubbles can form when speculation gets out of control in a self reinforcing cycle?
so yes, if there was no peak oil, no demand growth, no uncertainty wrt ME political stability of oil producing countries - prices would be much lower. but part of that is because there would also be no speculation induced bubble.
let me ask the question another way - what if all the factors remain the same, except for speculation? what if all the markets were very well regulated to prevent speculation from affecting prices (both future and spot) at all. what would the prices of crude oil be now?
I am wondering why deisel is now more expensive then conventional fuel
In the rough times, let’s all remember that it was Bush and the Republics that made those times possible.
If you look up the June 2006 Coleman Levin report,
http://levin.senate.gov/newsro.....062606.pdf
they note that while prices climbed in both 2004 and 2005 (by my calculations 33% and 40% respectively) this was at a time that oil supplies were at historic highs. So no I do not think that supply/demand is a principal driver of the spike in prices. It’s a curious thing with peak oil near or already upon us you would think that they would be but the supply/demand equation has not changed much in the last 3 years. Peak oil in this sense is something of a misnomer. It is more likely to be a plateau that could last 5 years or more but once production rates decline or supply rises much more than the current situation then yes, the supply/demand equation will change. It’s just not the case at the moment.
As for paper barrels, futures contracts can be bought well into the future but the one quoted most often is the NYMEX near future which is about delivery in the next month. As investment banks and hedge funds and others have been both predicting and engineering these price rises, it is unsurprising that the futures market has moved into a situation known as contango where the longer term contracts are higher in price than the near term contracts. They are saying and betting that prices will always go up much as they did with housing prices in the subprime bubble. In the long term they will be eventually correct but in the short term they are feeding a bubble that could collapse on them.
I, personally, don’t think sabre rattling against Iran has has much impact. I’m with the Oil Drum dudes. Peak Oil is here right now. The sabre rattling has been going on for some time, years. Attacking Iran in any way is ‘off the table’, keep in mind these are my opinions but…they are just as good as yours, no U.S. military commander is gonna accept an order from Bush or Cheney to attack.
They know what would happen, they’d get their asses kicked, Congress will want their balls…say goodby pension, and they understand what closing the Strait would mean economically, and I say they will resign first.
Peak Oil and continuing demand from SE Asia and China, although that will now start to decline due to those governments concerned abandoning their subsidies, are what is holding the price up.
The situation in Iraq don’t help but both that and that vis Iran have been steady state for a while thus, in my mind, removing them from what’s causing oil to stay high.
So far as i can see, The Bush administration, by way of the Iraq is responsible for about $2.50 a gallon of current gas prices. The main controlling factor in international oil prices is OPEC.
First, the war destabilized the entire Middle east. Things like tanker insurance prices began to go through the roof. Ditto insurance and general overhead for operating oil fields throughout the region. Second, all Arab nations got really scared about the possibility of major political/military upheavals throughout the region. Consider this also in light of the fact that these nations are sitting on a time bomb, consisting of exploding populations and no arable land to feed their citizens once the oil is gone.
the result? OPEC very sensibly decided to raise prices. And once discovering that the consuming nations would live with higher prices, the game is to see just how high prices can be raised, until the consumer nations begin to seriously cut back. In fact they remain ahead even if they manage to reduce demand by 50% (as opposed to the recent 1% drop) If they charge twice as much their income is the same even if demand drops 50%.
The trouble is, everyone in the oil game has an incentive to go along. Russia makes out well, Exxon makes out well, Bush’s oil patch cronies make out well, Venezuela, etc. etc makes our wonderfully. Everyone has an incentive to follow the OPEC lead
Had the Bush administration not put these dominoes in play, gas still would have become more expensive, due to Asian demand. But the run-up would have taken decades. Bush destabilized the middle east and blew the lid off. We might have hit $3.00 a gallon in 2020.
This is what comes of putting a crazy stupid person in charge.
Interestingly, Chevron’s stock went down today.
Again going back to my scandals list item 308, regular grade gasoline was $1.46/gallon when Bush took office. Add a 50% dollar devaluation factor (mostly for a quick eyeball calculation) and you might expect a gallon now to be around $2.20/gallon. This is mostly a guess because as I said gasoline prices are always the result of manipulation and there is also (or was) seasonal variation (a sinusoidal curve).
All of the vendors I use are adding a fuel surcharge onto their invoices.
I just wanted to thank you for your list. It’s horrible that it’s so long…and that we have to have one at all.
You are very much welcome.
Slim Pickens- er I mean T-Bone- claims that world oil production peaked in 2005. May be true. If we’re on the downside of the production curve- the peak oil people say that declines will come fairly rapidly.
I think it went under a dollar in 2001.
Just got back from the store, the cost of gas & diesel is pushing the price of everything up.
I am NOT better off now than I was four years ago. And there are but a few who are better off now than they were eight years ago.
Here’s the story on world oil production since 2004:
04 72.5 mmb/d
05 73.81
06 73.54
07 73.27
So T-Bone seems to be right- world oil production peaked in 05 and has been going slightly downhill since in the face of increasing demand.
That would seem to explain massive price increases.
An excellent and thoughtful post.
One element left out: the DROP in oil prices during the run-up to the 2006 elections. Is there any clearer indicator needed that the price of oil is being artificially managed to politically benefit the Corporate Republicans? I’m looking forward to the drop in oil prices that will occur this fall, between September and November…
Per the eminent compassionate conservative, Dr. Phil Gramm:
It’s all in your head … it’s a mental recession. Quitcherwhinin’ and take two more full-time jobs.
Except that it’s not the availability of pumped crude that’s the cause of reduced production (not YET). It’s the fact that the oil companies have deliberately curtailed their refining capacity in order to force a price-gouging shortage upon the world. Is that shortage inevitable? Sure. Did it have to happen right now? No.
I’m with you A. on the peak oil scenario…The world’s been living off of some VERY old oil fields and they are starting to shrink production…not enough new fields being discovered to make up the difference.
How would Iraq’s nonproduction since Bush’s invasion figure in?
Thanks for this very informative post. Below are some interesting links, with some info that people can play with.
James Hamilton attempts a crude calculation of appropriate ‘fundamentals’ price implied by long run flow demand and supply situation:
http://www.econbrowser.com/arc.....contr.html
Jeff Frankel looks for increases in oil inventories, and finds them in international data:
http://content.ksg.harvard.edu.....-minerals/
Both of these people are very good economists, but have differing views on reason for recent oil price increases. Frankel has outlined several potentially important mechanisms by which monetary policy can influence oil supply and prices, which include, but are not limited to, speculation on futures markets. You can find his explanations in earlier blog posts and their links. Frankel is quite happy he finally found some evidence of increase in inventories, since his theories require inventories to affect price.
One could, I think, combine the data Frankel found in the International Energy Agency’s Oil Market Report and combine it with Hamilton’ simple calculations to get a combined picture of flow markets and inventories. I might try to do that this weekend.
I do not think the effect of the Iraq invasion on investment policies and the long term investment cycle has been discussed enough. I think it is true that we are at the end of a 20-30 year investment cycle in mineral commodities, and the low price, high capacity, low investment part of the cycle is at an end.
I wonder how much of recent decline in production capacity has been due to low investment in countries around Iraq because of uncertainties due to the Iraq invasion and occupation?
I think there are three pieces that we do not have information to untangle yet:
1) possible approach of ‘peak oil’ (at least for one type of oil: cheaply obtainable ‘liquid’ oil, which does not poison or bankrupt us all to obtain)
2) investment cycle (and effect Iraq mess has had on that)
3) monetary policy/futures market interactions with commodities markets.
But, what the true story is has little bearing on what should have been wise energy policy in the US over last 20 years, and Congress and Clinton were marginal on that, and Congress and Cheney/Bush has been a disaster.
Also, I just noticed an interesting post by James Hamilton on the effect of oil price increase on economic growth/recession over next few months:
http://www.econbrowser.com/arc.....and_t.html
I think there are several factors that contribute to the higher cost of diesel:
1)Supply - Demand: My understanding is that Diesel refining capacity has not increased to meet the increased demand, thus increasing the “shortage” aspect of pricing.
2) What the market will bear: If the distribution chain raises the price, who’s going to do…what? Nothing. The price at the pump is…the price you pay. So truckers strike for a day. So what? They’ve got to eat so they’ll be hauling loads tomorrow.
3) How to boil a frog: Most freight is contracted to deliver using large fleets of trucks, and the pain of higher prices is applied in small amounts–two cents rise today, three next Monday, until months later it’s a dollar higher.
According to the EIA, it hit a low of $104.2 for the week of December 17, 2001. 3 things: First, we are talking average prices here so some places may have had lower prices than others. Second, this is part of what used to be the seasonal pattern in gasoline prices (that sinusoidal curve I was talking about). Third, the Saudis and others turned on the spigots following 9/11 in a show of solidarity (and good politics).
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/.....co_usw.htm
do you think the Saudi’s could be tapped out? or near to that?
Some of this must have to do with the Repubs endless harping on off-shore drilling, refineries, and other drilling. Kind of a manipulated oil shock and awe. I think speculators are rampant, the threat of attacking Iran, and just plain old gambling by investors. This bubble will burst. I call B.S. on the whole thing. JMHO
Do you think that only the US has reduced refining capacity or do you think that it’s a worldwide conspiracy….
I used to work for a company that owned a refinery—the damned thing was down half the time….
It’s NORMAL for the damned things to break down- and no one wants to build a new one cause they are expensive as hell and don’t make any money.
We could certaily import finished products rather than crude oil- don’t know why we don’t.
It would probably be a minor factor. Iraq wasn’t producing much before the invasion because of sanctions- then it started producing even less because of security problems (Iraqis blowing up the pipelines). Now it’s back to about what it was producing before Clusterfuck apparently..
Isn’t a huge part of the gas price problem due to the collapse of the US $?
I read a couple of books on the subject that suggest that may be the case.
There are four GIANT oil fields in Saudi Arabia. They have been harvesting them since the 50s. In many cases, they have damaged the fields through overproduction- and they are now trying every trip in the book including pumping water into the fields to drive oil to the surface.
The saudis are very secretive about their production and reserves and have a vested interest in creating the impression that they can turn up production anytime they want to. The books I read used professional Saudi papers presented a world conferences to determine that they are likely peaking and hiding the fact.
Yes. But the dollar is not collapsing. It is drifting down to long run equilibrium. If the dollar collapses (or emerging economies move away from their more lest fixed exchange rates to dollar too quickly, which might result in a collapse), then things will get even more interesting.
Saudia Arabia has been reprinting the same reserve figures for several years. No one really knows what they have.
Yep
And they ballyhoo new discoveries which never seem to pan out.
It’s a big part and the blame falls squarely on Bush and the Republics.
Apparently OPEC fears that the US and Europe could move strongly to alternative fuels and crater their market…..
COULD happen with proper leadership.
From your keyboard to God’s terminal…
Actually not. You are looking at crude oil (which in the context usually means crude oil and lease condensates). But it is probably more important to look at total liquids which includes other condensates and refinery gain and at the supply vs demand. If you look at these, supply and demand are in balance and for both 2006 and 2007 for example supply was slightly in surplus.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/t21.xls
A month after emerging victorious from the bruising Democratic nominating contest, some of Barack Obama’s glow may be fading. In the latest NEWSWEEK Poll, the Illinois senator leads Republican nominee John McCain by just 3 percentage points, 44 percent to 41 percent. The statistical dead heat is a marked change from last month’s NEWSWEEK Poll, where Obama led McCain by 15 points, 51 percent to 36 percent.
Newsweek
Proper leadership implies that Republics have no say.
Donita is here to put the proper spin on things
Not knowing the academic definition of “collapse” as it relates to currency, I have to say that the US economy today feels a lot like the Turkish economy back in the 90’s when the lira devalued 30% (iirc).
Iran’s missiles…faked….Borat missiles:
http://www.sciam.com/article.c.....an-missile
Your numbers seem to show the same thing- a peak in supply in 05.
I’m not sure how demand is measured–in a trivial sense demand always equals supply in the sense that every barrel sold is also a barrel bought.
OT - for folks not completely burnt out on FISA, i have a reference diary up a dkos. just on events in the house this past year (it’s NOT an obama diary!).
No. The price of West Texas Intermediate (the US benchmark) crude was $32 back when Bush came to office. Even if you figured in a 50% devaluation in the dollar that would mean crude should currently be trading at $48/bbl. It traded just today at nearly a hundred dollars more than that.
I don’t think there is an academic definition for ‘collapse’ in currency markets. I was being cheeky. I just meant that we are in a situation where the dollar could have been, and might still, fall much more suddenly than it has.
Recommended. Thanks for all you do, selise!
Again no, since there is storage capacity, demand can either be less than or greater than producton in any given period.
But that is about 16% of the price increase, right? So the devaluation plays a noticeable role. But you are correct, not the biggest.
From what I read, that is the biggest reason. I also read an analysis about the lack of drilling in our country. Gas was high under Carter and the companies, Exxon, etc, started drilling again because it was cost effective. Now that the prices are high they want to start drilling again but only the cheapest places to get it. Hurricanes can cause damage to the tourist industry which is what Florida depends on but I guess at this point it’s tough sh*t because Congress is not doing the right thing about finding alternatives.
OK so you measure demand by barrels sold and supply by barrels produced and the balance becomes inventory adjustment?
I’m burnt out. Admittedly I always thought that Hillary was to hawkish for me, but the options that we now have are Democratic or republican. I do hope that the ACLU can overturn either now or when Obama starts replacing the Supremes.
‘Peak Oil’ is not about being ‘out of oil…’ it’s about what happens to the markets when the production curve heads down.
Bad things.
And then there are worse things such as: The Road to Olduvai Gorge….
Clik on thru there to The Oil Drum. They will get you up to speed on this big and complex topic. You will be able to scare your friends shitless….
If they believe you.
Uh-oh…………
the price of oil is based on lots of things but right now the dollar is the biggest although the numbers I read was 40 percent. That number is high in comparison to the other factors.
Tee hee. Your cheekiness is lost on me.
Goan have to git rid of most of the rotten fruit in the ‘Democrat’ Party. And with Obambi bloviating about,
‘Coal…Mighty, mighty coal…’
We gotta a serious leader$heep problem.
And no….
Thear ain’t no such a thing as ‘clean coal’.
Dana Peroxide refuses to comment on the Der Speigel story that Clusterfuck pressured Frau Merkel stop Obama from making a speech at the Brandenburg Gate….
There’s been yet another odd twist in the story about alleged pressure by the Bush administration on the German government to block an Obama speech at Berlin’s historically-charged Brandenburg Gate: The White House isn’t denying the allegations.
At today’s White House press gaggle, reporters asked for a comment on the charges…
“I’m not going to comment on any conversations,” said White House press secretary Dana Perino.
“We have no view on the locations of candidates’ speeches or events. Our position is that the candidates have to make their own decisions.”
If Obama continues to move to the right- and continues to lose ground to McBush, the Super Delegates may experience a change of heart come convention time.
Excellent
Try putting gas in your trucks. It should work. Diesel engines will burn anything.
Pretty much.
DO NOT DO THIS!
THE FUKING THING WILL EXPLODE!
DO NOT DO THIS!
Me?
I think that Obambi’s no longer being able to come up with The Benjamin$ will have a lot more to do with it.
Umm, no, Bad things will happen in a big hurry!
DO NOT EVER PUT GASOLINE IN A DIESEL ENGINE!!!
Thanks for the safety tip. It didn’t SOUND like a great idea.
You know this for a fact? There is a lot of urban myth out there.
Do you know anything about multi-fuel engines? They are all diesel engines.
As I recall, Knuckles is a mechanic.
Yes I know this for a fact!
gasoline ‘Exlodes” in an engine because of an introduced spark, Diesels ignite the fuel through the heat of compression, gas lights off way to soon and detonates and REALLY.Bad. Things. happen.
Like blowing the head clear off the engine or throwing the rods out the side.
IANAL but I ARE a mechanic.
I know.
I owned a diesel for many years and you want to sent your cylinder head to the graveyard run it on gas.
You need to check your facts NOT all internal combustion engines are diesels. Not all multi-fueled engines are diesels.
Here’s one for ya….
Why are they called ‘deisel’s’?
Lotta ‘myths’ out there…..
I got me a different name for ‘em.