by TorrKing » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 13:14:26
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NWMossBack', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TorrKing', 'T')here seems to be a consensus that the net-exporters of oil, will be able to handle the crash better than the net-importers. I beg to differ. If I use my own country (Norway) as an example:
- We have a huge fund, much of it tied in foreign economies. In other words it will practically nullify when the economies go bust. This is what we are supposed to rely on after we become importers. Many exporters don't even have this.
- We are possibly net importers in 2015, calculated from the decline and consumption trends.
Right now the oil is so cheap that an economy crashing can adjust to a degree, while in 2015 it will be so scarce and expensive that this train definitely has passed.
While I think our outright crash will be postponed, we will also live in fairytale land for a longer time. So when we become net importers (from where?) our economy will crash quickly since we will fall pretty much straight from the top to the bottom.
Of course, it will not fall right from the top of wealth, because of trading partners becoming poorer will affect our economy first. But comparatively (to the US for instance), it will not be so bad.
What do you guys think?
I think it depends on how you define "crash". Life as we know it will be over for all of us eventually, importers and exporters. Why on earth would Norway want to go out and purchase $500 oil to support an unsustainable model? With even a marginally competent leadership, I would think Norway would use it's own oil/gas reserves to soften the transition to nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, tidal, biomass, etc. Not that it won't be a painful process, but you are way better positioned than the importers.
Well, would we have any choice? If we didn't buy oil, it would be too late to do anything assuming nothing had been done from before. And it sure doesn't look like anything is being done to me.