by eastbay » Thu 17 Jul 2008, 00:53:28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lanthanide', 'T')hat's not entirely true, Hogan. Oil demand is highly inelastic, which works in both directions - some forms of demand destruction will be permanent. For example if you normally commute 50miles to work and back (this seems absolutely ridiculous to me, living in New Zealand) but because of rising fuel prices you move closer to your job so that you only have to commute 10 miles a day, once the price goes back down you're unlikely to start driving an extra 40 miles each day for no reason.
So demand destruction can be permanent, but it requires prices to go up and stay up for an extended period of time. I don't believe the prices have stayed up long enough to make serious inroads yet, however.
Yes, but in the meantime, around 50 million more personal transportation vehicles (cars, mostly) are manufactured each year and they are ALL driven. 99.9% burning gasoline or diesel. A few million additional bbls/week added each year minimum.
A few million bbls/d here and a few million there and pretty soon you're talking about some serious fossil fuel burning. Oh yeah, since production is turning downward, that means... oh my, that means someone won't be able to drive as much anymore because prices must continue to rise. Each year another 50 million more. That's hard to imagine. 1/2 billion more ICE cars in 10 years. Wow. Plus the hundreds of millions of new motorcycles.
Maybe that's why prices are rising. Declining oil production and hundreds of millions of new cars. Silly humans.