[Yoshua]

Tight oil plays are turning into tight gas plays as the gas to oil ratio is increasing.

https://www.oilystuffblog.com/forum/for ... ng-lighter

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Yoshua', 'T')ight oil plays are turning into tight gas plays as the gas to oil ratio is increasing.

https://www.oilystuffblog.com/forum/for ... ng-lighter

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', 'T')he price data support my model.
You are the redneck. Present a statistical relevant dat set to support your idea. Demonstrate that the temperatures in reservoirs increase.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', 'H')ave you never heard of the difference between current $ and constant 2021 $ ?

[aadbrd]

How many advocates of this theory remain? Is it one or two, absent its founder? This thread therefore is aimed at trying to get literally a couple people to finally lose their religion? That tends not to be how theories die. There will always be a handful of die-hards who hold on, even the flat-earthers. Complete abandonment is really not the bar to use to determine when a model has been discredited.

[Roxy]

Actually, there are a lot of advocates to this theory, we just don’t post. I think the map is right on and will revert back to the line once all this money printing loses its affect.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Roxy', 'A')ctually, there are a lot of advocates to this theory, we just don’t post.

[Roxy]

You may be laughing now but it’s almost guaranteed you won’t have the last laugh. Also, I don’t recall anyone saying the price of oil is going to zero.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Roxy', 'Y')ou may be laughing now but it’s almost guaranteed you won’t have the last laugh.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Roxy', 'Y')ou may be laughing now but it’s almost guaranteed you won’t have the last laugh. Also, I don’t recall anyone saying the price of oil is going to zero.

[Baduila]

Both Adam and Outcast have never understood the physics; they never discussed it or had a question for thermodynamics. In addition, they are not able to read a graphics.

This is an original graphics from HG for the affordable oil price.


The graphics clearly shows ranges. But both guys insist, that the only relevant line is characterized by the light blue dots. Despite there is a writing "maximum affordable price" at the dark points of the graphics.
And Adam writes, the light blue points give 0$ for the 2020 oil price. Crazy.

They understand nothing. Discussing with them is a waste of time.

[Pops]

I can't figure why you guys would post THAT chart.
The projected price of oil using the "model" is north of $200 barrel about now.
If oil were $250/bbl it would have indeed crossed into unaffordability for many uses and there would indeed be a loss of demand, no doubt about it.

BUT IT AIN'T!

I overlaid an inflation adjusted price line, what short plotted against was nominal price which means nothing—his original flaw. His projected price is only close the 20 years of the run up to the frack glut, for most of the last 80 years the real price has been in the $25-50 range barring shortage. You could move that line back 40 years to the embargoes and it would fit as well It explains and projects nothing.

The original idea was fine, higher price means less demand. He started out looking at nominal price in the run up and tried to project the future. The frack glut sacked the price and broke most predictions. So the story changed into some doomer metaphysics to keep the report selling.

When extraction and refining uses enough to affect available supply (his original argument) and lower supply affects prices, then demand will fall. Everything else is crap.

There is exactly as much energy available to me in a gallon of gas today as there was in a gallon 10-20-50-100 years ago. It may take 10 times the energy to get it to me, but if the price is right why would I or the economy care? I pay 1000 times the caloric content to get January tomatoes.

Prove me wrong.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', 'B')oth Adam and Outcast have never understood the physics; they never discussed it or had a question for thermodynamics. In addition, they are not able to read a graphics.

This is an original graphics from HG for the affordable oil price.


The graphics clearly shows ranges. But both guys insist, that the only relevant line is characterized by the light blue dots. Despite there is a writing "maximum affordable price" at the dark points of the graphics.
And Adam writes, the light blue points give 0$ for the 2020 oil price. Crazy.

They understand nothing. Discussing with them is a waste of time.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', 'B')oth Adam and Outcast have never understood the physics;

[Baduila]

@Pops
This is one form of shorts original graphs, and i believe, about 98% of all discussions on ETP referred to this graph.
It displays the oil price in current dollars (red dots) and the solid blue line is a projection of the current price. Red dot and solid blue line do not include inflation. But the dotted black line and the light blue line include inflation. They have been set up using energy intensity diagrams (GDP vs primary energy use). Energy intensity lines include inflation and technical progress. This diagram shows that the solid blue line can not continue after about 2012, instead the oil price will follow roughly the blue arrows. Short did not know if the arrows will be more near the black or light blue point when he set up the graph.
Short has made some errors, and one of them was to believe that the oil price decay in 2014 has been caused only by energy problems, and fracking has been of no importance. So the light blue points seemed to form the valid line, and for some years all facts did support him.

But fracking had its part in the price decay, the oil price could increase after 2017, and shorts theory seemed to be wrong for the people only looking on the light blue dots of this single diagram.

But two things remain:
1. Shorts thermodynamic calculation is based on something, which is much harder than a rock:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics in the form of the „steady state rate balance equation“. See M.J.Moran/H.N.Shapiro: „Fundamentals of engineering thermodynamics“. Unfortunately, the physics background is heavy to understand for most people, and impossible to explain on a forum.
His calculation is correct, but some of the input parameters are not accurately known.
2. The oil price moves in the range of his calculations and goes slowly down after 2014, the inflation corrected price decreases since 2011. Most people believe, because oil production gets more expensive, the oil price must go up. But it doesn‘t.
3. Energy for production is nearly invisible in the economy. All products have a price, but in most cases nobody sees how much energy has been spent to generate the product. But economies run on energy. If one form of energy production uses more energy than it generates, it will be stopped (at least in the long run).

The gallon of gasoline has about the same energy content as ever, you are right. Evidently, you own a car and you can buy expensive tomatoes. You are a lucky one, neither homeless nor living in a developing country.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', ' ')Short did not know if the arrows will be more near the black or light blue point when he set up the graph.
Short has made some errors....

[Baduila]

Without comment.

[aadbrd]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', '
')Without comment.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', '[')img]https://i.ibb.co/30T58Tc/Brent-preis-prod-en-210524.png[/img]

Without comment.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Baduila', '
')Without comment.