
Here it is using a non-bootleg chart:

First, this is the Brent price, the reason being, pretty well everywhere in the world except Oklahoma (the mid-continent US) gets their oil via ship and right now Brent is the best price marker for floating oil.
According to the model in my brain, the economy is not able to pay above $100 for new, 'non-conventional' oil fields. This isn't written down anywhere, the number might be $120 or $80 but it seems pretty certain it's in the ballpark that correlates to 5%-10% of US GDP. On the first chart the red band around $100 is where the economy chokes, the orange, eyeballed trendline of "base" oil price seems to be entering that range now. On the second chart I placed an Excel trendline and whichever flavor I tried resulted in almost exactly the same result - right at $100 today.
So unless you hear some huge popping sound that indicates the Energy Fairy has pulled a miracle out of her ear, or conversely that austerity has finally had the inevitable effect of collapsing the economy completely, I think it is pretty clear we are entering into the realm of perpetual economic stagnation: unable to continue economic growth due to high energy price and in turn, unable to afford the increasingly higher cost of the marginal barrel.
Whether this is a result; a signal; or irrelevant to imminent geological decline I don't know and in fact it doesn't really matter. Right now oil mining in Canada needs an $80/bbl long term price forecast to get a green light for new projects. I mentioned in the Cheap Oil Tipping Point thread that if all the "new" oil being touted from every business page and web site will only be brought on line with a long-term selling price forecast greater than $80/bbl, we may be in a world of hurt if the economy can't pay.
Not only does each new marginal barrel have that $80-$100 price tag, every barrel of old fashioned $40 conventional oil we burn must be replaced with a new $80 barrel too. So not only would the economy not be able to grow, the oil supply it wouldn't be able to compensate for depletion of the remaining cheap oil. So the net effect is "economic peak oil".
What everyone got wrong before was thinking the price of oil would continue to climb without regard to demand. Presumably because we are so addicted we just couldn't or wouldn't stop buying it until we all fell over dead trying to pay $1,000/bbl. What actually happened was demand turned out to be elastic after all, high prices basically shut down the economies that couldn't pay. The resulting "elastic" reaction to $147 crude was a dive to $60/bbl after which the economy snapped back, after a fashion. At any rate, what is happening this time around with the slight disruption of Libya is milder rise and a quicker pull-back (probably because of the WTI glut) but what isn't happening is the big drop in price like in 2009 that gave the economy a little boost, or at least time to recoup.
So it seems to me we are entering The Zone, the end of the wedge, the place where expensive oil, oil-like substances and not-oil-at-all has come to the rescue temporarily but replacing depletion seems difficult going forward, let alone growing supply. The key term of course is expensive. All the business blogs are talking about the huge amounts of oil "recently discovered" and the "new" enabling technologies - of course what they neglect to point out is many of the resources themselves have been known about for decades and the primary new enabling technology is $100 oil.
http://www.odac-info.org/newsletter/2011/09/16
http://hulaco.net/index.php?option=com_ ... latestnews












