The Dress Rehearsal Is Over
As oil crosses $100 on its way south, not even a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico and a statement from OPEC that the cartel will cut production by over 500,000 barrels per day seems capable of halting the bloodletting. In response, the Financial Post features an article titled “Peak Oil peak,” quoting this writer out of context; compare this with my commentary, which was the source of the quote).
Wasn’t the price of oil supposed to rise endlessly? Wasn’t the world supposed to end by now? What happened? What does it all mean?
Patience, gentle reader. All will be explained.
First, why did the price of oil rise this summer to nearly $150? On this there is little agreement among the mavens. A new report by hedge fund managers Michael Masters and Adam White (released Sept. 10 by Sens. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash.) chalks it all up to speculation. Pension funds, college endowments, and other institutional investors bought heavily into commodity index funds earlier this year, and that sent the price of crude to the moon. Recently the same investors have taken their money out of oil futures, and this accounts for petroleum plunging back to earth. Move along, folks, nothing to see here.
But this directly contradicts the findings of an earlier study by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. That 100-page report concluded that the price run-up was all about supply and demand.
Confused yet?
Then there is the argument spinning through the rumor mill (sorry, no www attribution available on this one) that says the fall in oil prices since the end of July shows support by Wall Street for Republicans as the nation moves toward the November elections. After all, the reasoning goes, JP Morgan controls 40% of the puts and calls in the oil market; add Goldman Sachs and a few other big brokerage houses and there is the potential for manipulation of roughly half the total oil futures market.
If gas prices are rising, the electorate will be more likely to want to throw the (Republican) bums out and demand Change™. Wall street likes the favors the Bush administration has doled out over the past few years and wants more of the same. Or so the story goes.
The more prosaic explanation for the price spike: oil demand was rising, supply wasn’t, so the price went up. When the price got high enough, it (along with the credit crisis) caused the US (and world) economy to go into recession. That has seriously undercut demand for oil. Look at the drop in vehicle miles traveled, for example.
One thing we can be sure of: price matters; when the market speaks, people listen. During the weeks when petroleum was breaking a record nearly every day, there was unprecedented discussion of the Peak Oil concept in financial journals, both print and online. What’s more significant, people started driving less. Hummers sat on car lots, unsold. Airline companies and auto manufacturers teetered on the verge of bankruptcy.
In short, people woke up to the profound vulnerability implied by having based their economy, and by extension their very lives, on an impossibility—the extraction of a non-renewable resource at ever-increasing rates.
As the oil price fell, eyelids drooped.
But the price spike of early 2008 was merely a dress rehearsal. The fall in oil demand gives the world a moment to catch its breath before the inevitable price-ratcheting process starts up again. Meanwhile, at $100 or so, the price of oil is still 50 per cent higher than last year and 10 times the level of a decade ago.
When the next supply crunch comes, we could well see prices of $200, $250, or $300. But again, the rise won’t be steady and unending; we will again see a spike followed by a plunge—this time maybe back to $150.
Meanwhile, will oil at $100 be an occasion for sleepwalking or strategic regrouping? For policy makers, this is a time to think clearly about long-term measures to reduce demand pro-actively and support the development of renewable energy sources. For citizens, it is an opportunity to make the effort to change habits, buy a smaller car, and get involved in community Peak Oil prep work.
For those of us who have been involved in such work for several years, this is the hour to prepare for the inevitable tsunami, when journalists will call us day and night struggling to understand the concepts, and when city governments, businesses, and national politicians will plead for advice on how to cope. We’d better be ready.
The world has had an unmistakable wake-up call from the global oil alarm clock; merely to press the snooze button would waste what may be our last opportunity to act before necessity makes us react in ways that are less than optimal.
image credit: flattop341 (creative commons)









I like the image of the alarm silencer. It looks as if it has been used regularly. Such buttons played a prominent role in Tchernobyl. And they keep being used.
In Chernobyl, they disabled every single alarm in order to run the fatal test on the reactor.
For the US economy, the way the CPI, unemployment, inflation are calculated is a joke. Those are our alarm signals, but they have been so distorted that they are meaningless. With unemployment at ~ 10% and inflation at ~ 12%, surely we would have a very different perspective of the state of our economy.
But those alarm signals have been turned off by fuzzy calculations.
The shift in attitudes first toward panic (as the prices rose) and now back toward complacency or even scorn, in the space of a few months, shows how short-term and immediate our attention spans have become.
As many other peak oil watchers, I have been aware of this problem for years. A super-spike followed by a drop does not change the long-term picture one iota.
I wish more of our society would invest in long-term thinking. For this reason I am a big fan of the Long Now Foundation and their vision. Their iconic project, the Clock of the Long Now, though it may be gimmicky, provokes a new way of viewing our world. Imagine a clock that ticks every year, bongs every millenium, and is designed to last for 10,000 years. Unfortunately our popular media culture has totally dulled our sense of time.
As you say, we should be using this time to prepare ourselves. If we were smart, the price of oil might never hit $200. We would be ready with alternatives before it got that high, and as demand fell, it would keep the price from ever getting that high. No problem.
It's a complicated story, and another aspect is the fact that all commodities across the baord are taking a dive. Take a look at gold and other precious metals, for example.
You could make the argument that the other commodities are just tracking oil, and there may be some truth to that, but there have been recent reports that demand for gold boullion coins is running so high that some mints, including the US mint, have been forced to ration supply. For gold prices to be falling precipitously in an environment high demnand and of limited supply clearly indicates that something else is going on.
What that something is can be hard to pin down, especially for people not savvy to the inner workings of the financial powerhouses, but for whatever reason there are huge amounts of capital flying out of commodities and into the US dollar this month.
Market manipulation before the presidential election? Desperate attempts by insolvent hedge funds to raise cash? Fallout from Fannie and Freddie? Who knows, but it should be interesting to see how it plays out.
Cheers,
Jerry
In a move typical of this administration, the CFTC is essentially creating a "false truth" or "half-truth".
They are correct in that the recent runnup in price was a result of supply and demand... but not of actual consumed oil. Instead, it was the increased demand of oil contracts that drove up the price.
After all, there WASN'T a huge drop in supply of oil or a huge increase in actual demand... at least not enough to justify the current price surge.
So, the consumption or supply of oil hasn't changed much, but the demand for the contracts did. This is why the price spiked as much as it did.
The CFTC is just being good employees for the boss...After all, you can't elect an oil man (Bush) and an mercenary (Cheney) into office and not expect to see high oil prices and wars. If you elected Colonel Sanders into office nobody would be suprised if the price of chicken went up.
I do see the silver lining in all of this though... It has done things to change some people's perspecitives and make them seriously look at their consumption habits. People are moving closer to work, they're buying smaller cars and so for.
We may see an increased consumption if the cost stays down, but I don't think it will be for a few years or even a decade. Many people have seen what can happen and how quickly. It will take years for them to forget.
Hopefully we can get our acts together and find some alternatives in the mean time.
Not mentioned was China's easing up its growth engine for the Olympics and an almost simultaneous lifting of the constant war rhetoric aimed at Iran. This removed some demand and the "security premium" from the spot price and futures. This enabled the shorts to drive the market for a bit. China will soon return to pressing its development accelerator and countries unable to buy as much oil as they wanted at the much higher prices will re-enter the market to buy at what are perceived as sale prices, which will again drive price back up. Such rollercoaster price volatility was prediced by numerous peakists. The discussion in the wake of Gustav and Ika are US regional product shortages and their associated price spikes, which are themselves symptoms of Peak Oil.
Post new comment