Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 11, 2016
EIA Sees Brent Oil Prices Rebounding to $76 Per Barrel in 2017
The price of Brent crude oil should rebound in the next year to about $76 a barrel as consumption continues to increase in coming years, a key U.S. energy agency said on Wednesday.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration anticipates increased growth in fuel consumption, largely through growth in emerging economies in Asia, the Middle East and Africa, it said in an international outlook for the energy market.
This is the first EIA International Energy Outlook report since September 2014. The EIA said that due to the glut of supply, it expects the spread between U.S. crude and Brent to remain between $0 and $10 a barrel.
The EIA said it expects liquids production to grow by 30.5 million barrels/day by 2040. It said world GDP growth should average 3.3 percent in the next 25 years, largely due to stronger economic growth in emerging nations.
14 Comments on "EIA Sees Brent Oil Prices Rebounding to $76 Per Barrel in 2017"
Apneaman on Wed, 11th May 2016 11:39 am
If there is anything one can bank on in this world, surely it’s yet another EIA
industry hypingtop notch analytical “projection”.EIA Cuts Recoverable California Shale Estimates By 96%
http://www.businessinsider.com/eia-monterey-shale-2014-5
joe on Wed, 11th May 2016 11:56 am
Cant see that happening if fracking is still a threat, and it is. I guess the Saudis will hope Billary and the left will do their job for them and just ban it. The idiots on the right cant see whats really going on in front of their faces. Wouldn’t be suprised if Saudis were behind Sanders either. While obviously i realise fracking will destroy the earth, so will sunni-islamist Wahabbi Saudis if they get nukes. Its lose lose for regular folks.
PracticalMaina on Wed, 11th May 2016 12:34 pm
So the good news Apneaman, is there is still 4% that they can use to destroy the remainder of the aquifers in Cali with. Hooray for big business!
PracticalMaina on Wed, 11th May 2016 12:37 pm
Joe, there are reactors being built all over the middle east, with Russian help, Pakistan also already has them, so that seems like plenty to me to destroy things, or I wouldn’t be surprised if Turkey has some, Isreal, possibly Saudis already have one. North Korea, the cat is already out of the bag, the only way to avoid it being used in a war is to tone down the violence everywhere and try to rebuild cultures away from extremism after decades of war pushing them towards it.
dave thompson on Wed, 11th May 2016 2:01 pm
At $76 per I see the world economy quickly sputtering in to a recession. Today oil is trading in the $40 range and what is the economy doing? Not much. Double the price? See ya latter affordability.
Truth Has A Liberal Bias on Wed, 11th May 2016 4:37 pm
Food prices will be heading higher again soon as climate change devastates crops and oil prices increase. It was the food price increases secondary to oil price increases that precipitated the MENA conflicts that still persist. Central banks can kick this can down the road for a long way yet and most folks go with the flow as long as they have food and entertainment. The next round of food price riots will bring down more countries and the list of failed states will grow. Here comes the climate change-peak oil nexus. It’s impact will be devesrating.
JuanP on Wed, 11th May 2016 5:21 pm
If the EIA forecasts oil will be $76 in 2017, we can be 100% certain that it will not. The EIA has never gotten a forecast right that I am aware of. It has to be the most inefficient and wasteful agency in the US government.
My bet is oil will be worth anything except $76.
makati1 on Wed, 11th May 2016 6:51 pm
Truth, I doubt the Central Banks can do any more can kicking. The next kick could end it all. I think they have hit the proverbial immovable wall. Negative interest rates? End cash? Both will end their reign over the serfs who will rise up and reinstall those guillotines on the town square for all banksters, economists, and financial ‘advisors’.
Pass the popcorn.
makati1 on Wed, 11th May 2016 7:35 pm
More deception by the government liars? EIA. LMAO
“Weaponizing the Term “Conspiracy Theory”: Disinformation Agents and the CIA”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/weaponizing-the-term-conspiracy-theory-disinformation-agents-and-the-cia/5524552
The Dept. of Propaganda/Brainwashing is the only successful dept. in the Empire.
Boat on Wed, 11th May 2016 10:00 pm
So when the eia drops their estimate you have no problem believing that. Seems to me you accept and cheer anything that fits your narrative and reject the rest. Some of us like discussing the changing facts on the ground. I watch with amusement. Pass that popcorn.
shortonoil on Thu, 12th May 2016 4:18 am
Doing the same thing over, and over and expecting a different result is called “insanity”. The EIA has used the same algorithm for the last thirty years, and it has never worked. They estimate what the world economy will be at some point in the future, “assume” that the oil will be available to supply it, and project a price! Now what could go wrong?
Since ECON 101 seems to be all that they understand, why haven’t they asked the simple question of, “at what price does demand destruction begin forcing the price back down”. Or does the EIA take the same stance that the oil companies do, and that is that oil is a magical substance that the economy will pay anything to acquire; whether it has the money to do so, or not!
Simply put, none of these pundits have established what the value of oil is to the economy. The simple reason is that you can’t do it using ECON 101 to derive that number. Oil has a value to the economy because it can do work; it does that by providing energy. Without an energy determination there is no way to establish a price, and ECON 101 can not give an energy determination. So we did it another way:
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_022.htm
That tells us the maximum possible price on a time line. $76 is not in the cards for 2017. But it won’t bother the EIA that their projection won’t come true: they are obviously a little “batty” to begin with!
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
makati1 on Thu, 12th May 2016 5:19 am
Boat, I don’t believe ANYTHING that comes out of a government department. I don’t believe anything that comes out of the US MSM Iron Curtain “news” either. It is bullshit, evasions and diversions, not facts and news.
onlooker on Thu, 12th May 2016 5:42 am
Yes Mak, the news around the world has become govt/corporate propaganda. Nowhere as bad as the US but other places are also censoring. Look at China and how they censor the Internet. It is standard practice now for the “elected” govt to blitz with airwaves and print with news that favors them and/or news that discredits the former power holders or other party(s). In may cases seeking punitive measures against the previous power holders. All just internal power struggles. The ruling elites of quite a number of countries have done the bidding of the West for some time. That may be changing but old habits die hard
shortonoil on Thu, 12th May 2016 8:45 am
“The catalyst for the rally today seems to have been the IEA report where they have said production is going to fall faster and demand is going to rise more strongly than we previously thought,”
They were wrong on both counts, but their new projection is going to be correct?? So throw gobs of money on oil. The IEA says its going up, and happy days are back again!
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-idUSKCN0Y3056
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iea-oil-idUSKCN0Y30SI