Price of oil drops 24% in 2 months

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Peter Triggs
I'm told that the Canadian government is forcasting a long term price of $45/barrel but don't hold your breath.
[/url]

Thats actually a pretty good place for the price to be, balancing the needs of suppliers and consumers

Originally posted by Peter Triggs
.

It's not in OPEC's interests to let prices fall and I simply don't believe that they will allow it to happen:
[/url]

I believe very high prices are contrary to OPEC's interests in the long run as well. OPEC would like the price to be as high as it can be without triggering marked and permanent reductions in consumption behavior, or resort to alternatives

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Flubber


A couple of tanks?? Eitehr you get lousy mileage or you drive pretty far .

Go with option B.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Flubber
I believe very high prices are contrary to OPEC's interests in the long run as well. OPEC would like the price to be as high as it can be without triggering marked and permanent reductions in consumption behavior, or resort to alternatives

Or marginal producers -- like Canada's oilsands -- becoming dominant producers.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by DanS


Or marginal producers -- like Canada's oilsands -- becoming dominant producers.

I think of non-OPEC oil as being an alternative to OPEC oil

To me, its simple business-- you never want your prices to get so high that people start looking for ways to do without YOUR product

[DanS]

If you include non-OPEC oil as a substitute product, then we agree.

Further, there seems to be a wide variance of interests within OPEC.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by DanS


Further, there seems to be a wide variance of interests within OPEC.

QFT-- and largely the reason that OPEC can exhibit some control over the oil market but only to a point. Once economic and political interests begin diverging, its tough for OPEC to act with any authority

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


and the gas must have been worth what you paid at the time. After all you paid for it freely. Nobody forced you . If you don't want the gas at the price offered, you could walk or take public transit.

IN fact wouldn't communal transit be in line with your ideological cant

I had a two hour commute, but then you aren't really interested in my situation are you, as long as I buy the gas.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


I have never seen a reasoned argument why you should get any money back.

and "because I spent too much on gas" is not a reasoned argument

Of course it is.

[RGBVideo]

I do wonder what'll happen to the economies of countries depending on oil-exports like Russia, Venezuela and the Gulf states if the crude price drops below $50/bbl...

[TCO]

It is in the interests of net consumers to have prices as low as possible--$10/bbl would be ducky--and in the interests of net producers to have it as high as possible--$100/bbl would be ducky.

Crap about a right price or about reducing volatility is generally crap from producers who either are part of the cartel or who enjoy it's benefits.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by VJ
I do wonder what'll happen to the economies of countries depending on oil-exports like Russia, Venezuela and the Gulf states if the crude price drops below $50/bbl...

Probably far less than you would think. Prices above $50 are a recent phenomenon and I would hope that most states/corps have not budgetted based on it remaining that high

[Flubber]

Originally posted by TCO
It is in the interests of net consumers to have prices as low as possible--$10/bbl would be ducky--and in the interests of net producers to have it as high as possible--$100/bbl would be ducky.

Crap about a right price or about reducing volatility is generally crap from producers who either are part of the cartel or who enjoy it's benefits.

Your quote has an element of truth but also misses key elements.

$10 oil might be "ducky" but then a whole bunch of new production does not get done. Deepwater finds like Jack2 or much of the world's heavy oil, are not economic at those prices. So consumers might enjoy it but it doesn't pay the basic costs of much of the newer production out there. The price doesn't fundamentally support continued production that meets demands. OH ya and at that price few few if any of the greener power sources get done.

$100 oil . . . Producers like it in the short run and sure if it were sustainable they would love it long run . .. BUT the fact is that such a price makes hydro, nuclear, wind, tidal and coal all not only more possible but heck very very competitive -- in fact much cheaper in most cases. IT also makes it more likely that people start conserving more etc etc.

I know a few oil companies and while the execs were generally happy with the high prices their oil commanded, they also saw costs skyrocket for every supply and service out there .. . it makes planning difficult.

On the government side, Alberta likes the high royalties from the high price but at the same time it has fuelled a too-rapid boom. Government is stuggling to keep up as suddenly everyone wants to pump as much oil as possible. IN many ways, the government would have preferred a lower, less volatile price.


So on each end your "ducky" prices are not that good in the long run. While on the consumer end, people may think short term, I can assure you that on the producer end, all the big boys take a very long term view.

[TCO]

I want a competetive, non-cartel price. I am quite happy with letting the market and financial interests take care of the long term. Would much rather have a volatile, but overall lower price then a cartel-controlled one.

[TCO]

Let's open up ANWAR (silly Demos) and drill off of Florida (silly Bush). Sometimes cracking a dam just takes a small rivulet of water getting through. Let's get some excess production and then get the cartle to start cheating on each other.

[pchang]

Lets

start turning soybeans into diesel.