by threadbear » Tue 02 Sep 2008, 00:57:19
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'T')he price per barrel ROSE from $55.00 to 147.00 in a year and a half. It came close to tripling in price, and people here were arguing it was all due to a shortage of supply. Now a 30.00 drop from 147.00 may not appear to be much, but it is HUGE, taken that a barrel was only 55.00, last year. These are huge swings, and though the peak oil theory is playing out over time, it fails to fully explain the recent run up and run down. You seem to be emotionally attached to an idea and are unable to let go of it.
For the naysayers you need to ask yourself a few questions before giving the latest oscillations in the oil price any lasting significance:
1. What big new fields have come online as a result of the price run up during the past 2 years? After all, plenty of incentive find and pump. If none, then how many do you foresee coming on stream as the price continues to drop?
2. Has a ready substitute for oil been made during the same period sufficient to affect demand for the product?
3. In a world were there are no ready substitutes for oil, how long do you think low prices will last without new sources of supply (new giant fields) becoming available?
4. How long do you think demand destruction, either because of high prices or conservation, would continue to make an impact on price and supply in a global economic environment, where oil consumption has shown an upwards trend for the past nearly 40 years?
Who's a naysayer? Peak oil is a reality that simply doesn't fully explain the recent run up. Why should anyone run a gauntlet of questions that ask them to predict the future by people who can't analyze the present or recent past?