Six conspiracy theories behind plunging oil prices

[Captain Obvious]

7 if you count giving the O'bama credit for any of it.

Go to the link for the in-paragraph talking points, otherwise I'd basically have to quote the whole piece.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/the-conspiracy-theories-behind-plunging-oil-prices/article22361121/

[Peter1469]

It is Saudi Arabia v US fracking.

[iriemon]

7 if you count giving the O'bama credit for any of it.

That would be kind of like blaming Obama when gas prices went up.

[donttread]

7 if you count giving the O'bama credit for any of it.

Go to the link for the in-paragraph talking points, otherwise I'd basically have to quote the whole piece.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/the-conspiracy-theories-behind-plunging-oil-prices/article22361121/

Since the supply if this "market" is ALWAYS artificially controlled , oil prices are ALWAYS a CONSPIRACY

[Mini Me]

"If you want to know the intent, just look at the results"

[Bob]

That would be kind of like blaming Obama when gas prices went up.

Obama clearly told the world he wanted fuel prices to skyrocket.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRzKutZMrHo

[waltky]

Oil prices slidin' back down again...
:cool2:
Oil prices fall as concerns rise over rally petering out
Mon Mar 28, 2016 - Oil prices fell in early Asian trade on Tuesday as concerns mount that a rally since January is fizzling out, while analysts forecast another rise to record levels for U.S. crude stockpiles.


U.S. oil CLc1 was down 13 cents at $39.26 a barrel at 0211 GMT, after finishing down 7 cents at $39.39, the previous session. Brent LCOc1 fell 16 cents to $40.11. On Monday it settled down 17 cents at $40.27 a barrel. U.S. commercial crude oil stockpiles were expected to have reached record highs for a seventh straight week, while refined product inventories likely fell, a preliminary Reuters survey showed late on Monday. API

The poll of eight analysts, taken ahead of weekly inventory reports from industry group the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration (EIA), estimated, on average, that crude stocks rose 3.2 million barrels in the week ended March 25.

The API will release its data on Tuesday at 2030 GMT, while the EIA will publish its data on Wednesday at 1430 GMT. Both oil benchmarks are up about 50 percent from 12-year lows hit in mid-February but the oil market has taken on a weaker tone in the past week, along with other commodities. "The recent rally appears to be running out of steam as investors pull back on bullish positions," ANZ said in a morning note on Tuesday. "This will remain the case without continued improvement in fundamentals."

With oil prices rising strongly since January, most analysts are predicting the end of the year-and-a-half long slump, but also betting that there is little upside in the near future. Barclays said net flows into commodities totalled more than $20 billion in January-February, the strongest start to a year since 2011, and prices could fall 20 to 25 percent if that were reversed. "Were such a scenario to unfold, the price of oil could fall back to the low $30s," it said on Monday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-idUSKCN0WU01Y

See also:

Factbox: Oil price rebound widely seen capped at $45, for now
Mon Mar 28, 2016 - With oil prices having gained about 50 percent since touching multi-year lows in January, most analysts are predicting the end of the year-and-a-half long rout, but also betting that there is little upside in the near future.


After falling as low as $26 a barrel, U.S. crude oil futures hit a 2016 high of nearly $42 a barrel last week. On Monday they were trading at around $39 a barrel, with some analysts betting the rebound had run its course.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-oil-predictions-factbox-idUSKCN0WU182?mod=related&channelName=ousivMolt

[Kurmugeon]

It is Saudi Arabia v US fracking.

Yes, and the new earth oil techniques will produce enough for another 30-60 years... still, in the end, it will run out.

And the tail end of the earth oil will be expensive, sulfur loaded and polluting, and very dear.

So, while we still have Oil to run trucks and generators, Natural Gas for forges, plastics and kilns, and coal for smelters...

Since it will take 30-40 years to build, shouldn't we begin to build the next generation of Renewable, Synthetic Fuel and plastic Synthesis Factories?

Isn't that just basic responsibility to our grand kids, and just common sense?

-

[Mac-7]

Why does there have to be a grand scheme?

Basic economics tells us that greater supply relative to demand results in lower prices.

i guess liberal tree huggers are confused because it has not been that long since they were shouting PEAK OIL! to warn us that mankind had used up most of the oil and we'd better hurry up and build windmills or we would be sitting in darkness.

Instead the geologists and engineers keep finding new oil in new places that are not under the control of OPEC.

But thats too easy, huh?

the wizzards of smart

(some of them posting on this forum no doubt)

who were so wrong just 10 years ago need an explaination now that is not their fault.

That way they can keep telling us how smart they are.

[Peter1469]

Yes, and the new earth oil techniques will produce enough for another 30-60 years... still, in the end, it will run out.

And the tail end of the earth oil will be expensive, sulfur loaded and polluting, and very dear.

So, while we still have Oil to run trucks and generators, Natural Gas for forges, plastics and kilns, and coal for smelters...

Since it will take 30-40 years to build, shouldn't we begin to build the next generation of Renewable, Synthetic Fuel and plastic Synthesis Factories?

Isn't that just basic responsibility to our grand kids, and just common sense?

-

Regardless of peak oil I have said this before. Energy Victory. (http://www.energyvictory.net)

[Mac-7]

Regardless of peak oil I have said this before. Energy Victory. (http://www.energyvictory.net)

And you were wrong.

We didnt need new laws forcing everyone to conform to the new energy plan dreamed up in washington.

All we needed was less government regulation and more oil.

[FindersKeepers]

It is Saudi Arabia v US fracking.


This is it in an nutshell.

Saudi has been running a glut with the express purpose of shutting down US oil production. It succeeded in many areas.

We need to get out of OPEC.

Despite reports from the 70s and 80s, the US has some of the largest untapped resources on earth. We don't need to keep pumping money into the Middle East. "Cavemen in designer jeans," is the expression I've heard and it's apropos.

There might be a tad of "bonus" when it comes to winging Russia, but it's not the main reason. Saudi is trying to break the US oil market. We're too scared to do much of anything about it.

[Peter1469]

And you were wrong.

We didnt need new laws forcing everyone to conform to the new energy plan dreamed up in washington.

All we needed was less government regulation and more oil.

The plan in the book was not dreamed up in Washington. The book addresses your concern. And the website as a power point short version.

[Mac-7]

The plan in the book was not dreamed up in Washington. The book addresses your concern. And the website as a power point short version.

Ok, I did not study the plan so I could be wrong.

but basicly it promotes ethanol and maybe bio-diesel, correct?

[FindersKeepers]

Ok, I did not study the plan so I could be wrong.

but basicly it promotes ethanol and maybe bio-diesel, correct?


Ethanol is just about over -- it utilizes too much cropland for making fuel and it uses too much energy to produce that fuel.

That said -- and this comes from a person raised in the fossil fuel industry -- we need to continue research into alternative sources of energy. Wind is never going to pay off -- solar has a slightly better (but not great) chance, but we need to push on.

We have over a hundred years of good sources of coal and oil but it's still a finite resource.

We need to push on...

[waltky]

Mac-7 wrote: i guess liberal tree huggers are confused because it has not been that long since they were shouting PEAK OIL! to warn us that mankind had used up most of the oil and we'd better hurry up and build windmills or we would be sitting in darkness.

Instead the geologists and engineers keep finding new oil in new places that are not under the control of OPEC.

It is interesting to note...

... that oil producers are having to drill deeper and deeper...

... to find what 'new oil' they are finding.

At some point they are going to have to figure out how...

... any 'new oil' can be produced...

... without drilling for it.

[Peter1469]

Ok, I did not study the plan so I could be wrong.

but basicly it promotes ethanol and maybe bio-diesel, correct?

Alcohol in general to replace gasoline for transportation fuels.

[Peter1469]

Ethanol can be made from non-food crops and many of the crops suitable for ethanol can be grown on less quality land. There needs be no competition.
Ethanol is just about over -- it utilizes too much cropland for making fuel and it uses too much energy to produce that fuel.

That said -- and this comes from a person raised in the fossil fuel industry -- we need to continue research into alternative sources of energy. Wind is never going to pay off -- solar has a slightly better (but not great) chance, but we need to push on.

We have over a hundred years of good sources of coal and oil but it's still a finite resource.

We need to push on...

[Mac-7]

Mac-7 wrote: i guess liberal tree huggers are confused because it has not been that long since they were shouting PEAK OIL! to warn us that mankind had used up most of the oil and we'd better hurry up and build windmills or we would be sitting in darkness.

Instead the geologists and engineers keep finding new oil in new places that are not under the control of OPEC.

It is interesting to note...

... that oil producers are having to drill deeper and deeper...

... to find what 'new oil' they are finding.

At some point they are going to have to figure out how...

... any 'new oil' can be produced...

... without drilling for it.

Twenty or thirty years ago the know-it-all crowd assured us all the oil would be gone by now.

So the oil companies have to drill deeper or drill smarter.

the problem is that because liberals cannot think of new ways to produce oil they assume that no one can.

Because they are the smartest people in the room, right?

but they are wrong.

[Mac-7]

Ethanol can be made from non-food crops and many of the crops suitable for ethanol can be grown on less quality land. There needs be no competition.

If its so good then you dont need a new law and strong arm tactics to make it happen.

[FindersKeepers]

Ethanol can be made from non-food crops and many of the crops suitable for ethanol can be grown on less quality land. There needs be no competition.


In a sense, that's true. Seed corn, which is typically grown for biofuel is not meant for consumption by humans. That stuff is just awful -- food wise.

It can also be grown (in some situations) without irrigation, but many food crops are also not irrigated, like wheat, canola and soybeans.

There is also a type of forage -- can't remember the name of it right now -- that can be grown for biofuel.

Where the issue of ag crops comes in is when a farmer pulls his ground out of ag production for biofuel production. In recent years, biofuel crops have been heavily subsidized, making them attractive to farmers who used to grow wheat.

Now, that's been off-set by GMO crops that produce LOTS more per acre, but there are concerns with those, as we discussed earlier.

Around my neck of the woods, farmers have been waiting until their CRP contracts ran out and planting seed corn for biofuel. While that isn't in competition, as you say, it depletes the land, and increases the risk of blow-off, as we saw in the "dirty thirties."

So, farmers around here, eager to get the biofuel crop subsidies, reduce food crops. That drives up the price of grain, which drives up the price of food at the market. Probably not enough to make a difference, but a little.

One alternative is the production of butanol in former ethanol plants. It takes some conversion, but butanol burns clean and will not leave the residue in engines that ethanol leaves. Plus, it offers better gas mileage.

I don't know what the answer is -- but it appears that, as a nation, we're quietly working away from ethanol. Just too costly to produce without the subsidies.

[Ethereal]

As I see it, there are two major factors influencing the drop in oil prices.

The market and geopolitics.

The market is driving prices down through simple supply and demand. The shale revolution throughout the Americas has been a big reason for this.

Geopolitics involving Russia and Iran are the other factor. The Russian and Iranian governments are heavily dependent on high oil prices, so their adversaries (the US and Saudi Arabia) have been trying to hurt their economies by keeping oil prices lower. And I don't think that's a "conspiracy theory" at this point.

[Kurmugeon]

I don't want Renewable Energy to save the planet, I know beyond any doubt that Mother Earth can look after herself with power far beyond anything mankind can control or even fully fathom.

I want Renewable Energy for America, because it will grant our nation a significant economic Advantage, when fossil fuels become scarce and therefore expensive.

I do not want a big Government Program solution, Solyndra, as it were, to achieve that Renewable Energy, I just want the damn government to get out of the way of the researchers, innovators and businesses who can and will solve the problem.

I haven't seen much of anything useful come out of Government since the rise of Political Correctness in the 1980s.

You can't pursue Officially Institutionalized Racial Discrimination to achieve "Social Justice", AND get the most talented, inovative and driven students through science, math, and engineering higher education... Pick one or the other, but you can't have BOTH!

If you're picking scholarships based on skin tone, you're unlikely to get Engineering and Innovation Talent.

-

[Mac-7]

I don't want Renewable Energy to save the planet, I know beyond any doubt that Mother Earth can look after herself with power far beyond anything mankind can control or even fully fathom.

I want Renewable Energy for America, because it will grant our nation a significant economic Advantage, when fossil fuels become scarce and therefore expensive.

I do not want a big Government Program solution, Solyndra, as it were, to achieve that Renewable Energy, I just want the damn government to get out of the way of the researchers, innovators and businesses who can and will solve the problem.

I haven't seen much of anything useful come out of Government since the rise of Political Correctness in the 1980s.

You can't pursue Officially Institutionalized Racial Discrimination to achieve "Social Justice", AND get the most talented, inovative and driven students through science, math, and engineering higher education... Pick one or the other, but you can't have BOTH!

If you're picking scholarships based on skin tone, you're unlikely to get Engineering and Innovation Talent.

-

I'm sure the oil companies are studying alternative energy.

thats their business.

the problem is tree huggers in and out of government who are on a mission to save Mother Earth even if you arent.

They won't wait for the free market to do the "right" thing as they define right.

[MisterVeritis]

Ethanol is just about over -- it utilizes too much cropland for making fuel and it uses too much energy to produce that fuel.

That said -- and this comes from a person raised in the fossil fuel industry -- we need to continue research into alternative sources of energy. Wind is never going to pay off -- solar has a slightly better (but not great) chance, but we need to push on.

We have over a hundred years of good sources of coal and oil but it's still a finite resource.

We need to push on...
We should use nuclear power for everything that does not move (or moves in a controlled fashion) and petroleum for everything that does.

[Tahuyaman]

It is Saudi Arabia v US fracking.

Is Iran flooding the market as well driving prices down?

[Tahuyaman]

I know beyond any doubt that Mother Earth can look after herself with power far beyond anything mankind can control or even fully fathom.......

-

Absolutely.

[Mac-7]

We should use nuclear power for everything that does not move (or moves in a controlled fashion) and petroleum for everything that does.

Liberals hate nuclear energy also.

[Tahuyaman]

Liberals hate nuclear energy also.


Actualy, they have no issue with nuclear power. Their utopian societies all utilize nuclear power.

They just have this Pavlovian response to the word nuclear. Every time they hear the word, they think about an ICBM landing in their living room, or a nuclear holocaust of some sort.

[Peter1469]

If its so good then you dont need a new law and strong arm tactics to make it happen.

Which strong arm tactic would you be concerned about?

[Peter1469]

Then the book Energy Victory is for you!


I don't want Renewable Energy to save the planet, I know beyond any doubt that Mother Earth can look after herself with power far beyond anything mankind can control or even fully fathom.

I want Renewable Energy for America, because it will grant our nation a significant economic Advantage, when fossil fuels become scarce and therefore expensive.

I do not want a big Government Program solution, Solyndra, as it were, to achieve that Renewable Energy, I just want the damn government to get out of the way of the researchers, innovators and businesses who can and will solve the problem.

I haven't seen much of anything useful come out of Government since the rise of Political Correctness in the 1980s.

You can't pursue Officially Institutionalized Racial Discrimination to achieve "Social Justice", AND get the most talented, inovative and driven students through science, math, and engineering higher education... Pick one or the other, but you can't have BOTH!

If you're picking scholarships based on skin tone, you're unlikely to get Engineering and Innovation Talent.

-

[Peter1469]

Is Iran flooding the market as well driving prices down?

Not yet. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-05/iranian-oil-goes-back-on-the-market)


Oil traders and analysts are far more conservative about the country’s ability to quickly increase production. “We believe the potential removal of Iranian sanctions could provide strong conditions for a recovery in oil production, but we do not share the optimism expressed by some market commentators on the speed of the production turnaround,” says Ildar Davletshin, an analyst at Renaissance Capital in London.

[Tahuyaman]

I'm considering selling my oil stocks.

[del]

i just told my broker to buy