2001/2 GLOBALE OEL - ENERGIEKRISE : sie kommt ! - 500 Beiträge pro Seite
eröffnet am 16.06.01 11:53:50 von
neuester Beitrag 25.02.03 10:57:03 von
neuester Beitrag 25.02.03 10:57:03 von
Beiträge: 24
ID: 421.948
ID: 421.948
Aufrufe heute: 0
Gesamt: 709
Gesamt: 709
Aktive User: 0
Top-Diskussionen
| Titel | letzter Beitrag | Aufrufe |
|---|---|---|
| vor 57 Minuten | 2427 | |
| vor 31 Minuten | 1903 | |
| vor 47 Minuten | 1319 | |
| vor 1 Stunde | 579 | |
| vor 39 Minuten | 546 | |
| gestern 11:56 | 517 | |
| gestern 23:36 | 514 | |
| gestern 21:36 | 428 |
Meistdiskutierte Wertpapiere
| Platz | vorher | Wertpapier | Kurs | Perf. % | Anzahl | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 1. | 18.545,36 | +0,20 | 207 | |||
| 2. | 2. | 162,12 | -0,23 | 113 | |||
| 3. | 3. | 10,060 | -1,76 | 99 | |||
| 4. | 7. | 0,3300 | -65,62 | 87 | |||
| 5. | 4. | 0,1995 | +3,10 | 79 | |||
| 6. | 6. | 1,1000 | -1,17 | 63 | |||
| 7. | 5. | 4,1300 | -1,08 | 55 | |||
| 8. | 9. | 6,6480 | 0,00 | 42 |
Feedback
Es wussten alle die es wissen wollten !
Der Bericht an den US Präsidenten - Global 2000 , 1980 !!!
Oft wird argumentiert, alle früheren Vorhersagen über die Größe und die Reichweite der Erdölvorräte wären fehlerhaft gewesen. Entsprechend dieser Linie wird dann jede neue diesbezügliche Aussage als von vornherein ebenfalls von zweifelhafter Qualität hingestellt, vergleichbar den früheren Aussagen.
Tatsache ist jedoch, dass man spätestens seit den 70er Jahren weiß, dass das Maximum der Neufunde bereits in den 60er Jahren überschritten wurde (siehe z.B. die Folie Nr.1) - denn seit dieser Zeit geht der Trend beim Auffinden neuen Öls zurück. Spätestens ab diesem Zeitpunkt konnte man auch durch entsprechende Trendextrapolationen hinreichend verlässliche quantitative Aussagen wagen.
So haben sich weder die Aussagen des ersten Berichts des Club of Rome "Die Grenzen des Wachstums" aus dem Jahr 1972 bisher als vollkommen falsch erwiesen, noch erst recht die wesentlich detaillierteren und fundierteren Aussagen des 1980 erschienenen Berichtes "Global 2000" .
Im Gegenteil entsteht beim Wiederlesen der Analysen der Eindruck, dass man damals durchaus bereits in der Lage war, zu wissen, was man wissen wollte oder mußte.
Im Bericht des Club of Rome wurde die prinzipielle Unmöglichkeit eines anhaltenden exponentiellen materiellen Wachstums innerhalb eines begrenzten Systems diskutiert. Die Energierohstoffe bildeten dabei nur einen betrachteten Parameter unter mehreren. Beispielhaft wurde für Erdöl eine Quantifizierung durchgeführt. An Erdölreserven waren damals 72,5 km3 bekannt entsprechend 456 Gigabarrel. Beim damaligen Verbrauch hätte das einer statischen Reichweite von 31 Jahren entsprochen. In den Tabellen des Berichts wurde darüber hinaus angenommen, dass etwa die fünffache Menge an Erdöl insgesamt vorhanden ist. Das entspräche 2280 Gb und bei den damaligen Verbrauchswachstumsraten von 3,9 % p.a. einer dynamischen Reichweite von 50 Jahren.(Siehe dazu z.B. in der deutschen Ausgabe die Tabelle 4.)
Während "Die Grenzen des Wachstums" vor allem die prinzipiellen Zusammenhänge diskutierte, war des Anliegen des 1980 erschienenen Berichts "Global 2000", eine nach damaligem Wissen bestmögliche quantitative Beschreibung der künftigen Versorgungssituation mit Rohstoffen zu geben. Die Studie war vom damaligen US-Präsidenten Carter beauftragt worden und in mehrjähriger Arbeit von einem vielköpfigen Expertenteam (auch unter Einbeziehung externer Experten) erstellt worden. Erst nach dem bald folgenden Machtwechsel im Weißen Haus zum neuen Präsidenten Reagan wurde es schnell still um die Untersuchung. Statt dessen wurde der Sternenkrieg (SDI) als neue Herausforderung Amerikas begriffen.
In dem 1500 Seiten starken Werk finden sich zahlreiche Aussagen zur Verfügbarkeit von Erdöl. Die Basis der Aussagen bildete zum einen die für die Weltenergiekonferenz 1977 von einem Expertenteam erarbeitete Untersuchung "Report on Oil Ressources 1998-2020" und zum anderen die am MIT erarbeitete Studie "Energy Supply-Demand Integrations to the Year 2000". Diese Grundlagen wurden als bestmögliche Quellen benutzt.
Zusammenfassend heißt es in Global 2000 unter anderem:
"Darüber hinaus scheint bei der Erschließung neuer Erdölreserven die Erfolgsquote bezogen auf den jeweiligen Explorationsaufwand zu fallen"
(Seite 72 der deutschen Ausgabe)
sowie
"Obwohl diese Varianten für das Jahr 2000 zu verschiedenen Höchstproduktionsniveaus kommen, indizieren sie doch, daß die mögliche Nachfrage im Jahr 2000 wahrscheinlich nicht durch Rohölproduktion aus konventionellen Quellen gedeckt werden kann. Neue Ölfunde oder höhere Erschließungsraten können diesen Scheitelwert zwar um einige Jahre hinausschieben, würden aber den unvermeidlichen Rückgang der Ölreserven nicht verhindern." (Seite 415)
Nach Auffassung der damaligen Experten würde sich die "Recovery-Rate", also der Anteil des in einem Vorkommen insgesamt vorhandenen Öls, der wirklich aus dem Ölfeld entnommen werden kann, von 25 % im Jahr 1975 auf etwa 40 % im Jahr 2000 erhöhen (Seite 414). Tatsächlich betrug die Recovery-Rate der 200 größten Ölfelder nach einer Untersuchung von J. Laherrere aus dem Jahr 1998 etwa 40 % und stimmt also sehr gut mit der etwa 20 Jahre alten Prognose überein.
Die beiden nachfolgenden Grafiken sind aus dem Bericht "Global 2000" entnommen und wurden um die Darstellung der seither tatsächlich erfolgten Entwicklung ergänzt. Wie man sieht, stimmt die tatsächliche Entwicklung sehr gut mit den damaligen Prognosen überein.
Sowohl die Menge des insgesamt vorhandenen Erdöls (Estimated Ultimate Recovery), als auch die künftige maximal mögliche Förderrate der Erdölproduktion wurden damals sehr genau vorhergesagt und müssen bis heute nicht korrigiert werden.
Abbildung Kumulierte Erdölfunde und kumulierte Erdölproduktion. (kleine Tabelle siehe weiter unten)
Die Extrapolation wurde anhand der damals veröffentlichten Reservestatistiken erstellt. Damals wurden Höherbewertungen noch nicht rückdatiert, sondern dem Jahr der Höherbewertung zugeschrieben. Dies hatte zur Folge, dass der steile Anstieg der kumulierten Ölfunde gegen Ende wesentlich stärker zurückgeht.
Quelle: Global 2000, dt. Ausgabe, 1980
Die Zahlen in der Tabelle liegen in der Bandbreite der auch heute besten Zahlen. Dies ist unseres Wissens auch das letzte Mal gewesen, dass große Ölgesellschaften ihre eigenen Einschätzungen zur weltweiten Ressourcenlage offengelegt haben..
Abbildung Kurve des Produktionsmaximums in Abhängigkeit von unterschiedlichen Verbrauchszenarien
In der Studie "Global 2000" ging man davon aus, dass der Ölverbrauch mit einer Rate von 2 - 3 % p.a. , möglichweise sogar mit 5 % p.a. wachsen würde. Unter diesen Voraussetzungen war das Produktionsmaximum in den 90er Jahren, bzw. bei 5 % p.a. Wachstum Mitte der 80er Jahre zu erwarten, wobei die Maximalproduktion je nach Szenario zwischen 85 - 100 Mio Barrel Tagesproduktion gesehen wurde.
Tatsächlich entwickelte sich jedoch die Ölnachfrage wesentlich langsamer, nämlich seit 1975 im Mittel nur mit etwa 1,3 % p.a. . Unter dieser Voraussetzung ist das Produktionsmaximum um das Jahr 2002 bei etwa 80 Millionen Barrel Tagesproduktion zu erwarten. Diese Entwicklung wurde von energiekrise.de nachträglich in Rot in die Grafik eingetragen. Damit stimmt die alte Prognose aus dem Jahr 1980 bzw. 1977 mit den aktuellen Einschätzungen von Campbell, Laherrere, aber auch von Rubin (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce) und Magoon (US-Geological Survey) sehr gut überein. Man darf daher annehmen, dass Insider der Szene seit mehr als 20 Jahren sehr gut die Situation der Ölindustrie kennen.
Unseres Wissens war "Global 2000" die einzige jemals einer breiten Öffentlichkeit zugängliche ernsthafte Analyse der tatsächlichen Situation. Das Buch konnte damals in jeder Buchhandlung erworben werden. Bezeichnenderweise war dies auch die letzte derartige Veröffentlichung. Unsere Interpreation: Die Studie entstand als unmittelbare Reaktion auf die beiden Ölpreisschocks der 70er Jahre. In den darauf folgenden Jahren bildete sich dann immer mehr ein Interessenkonflikt heraus zwischen den Ölverbraucherstaaten - allen voran der USA - und den wesentlichen Ölförderländern - allen voran den Staaten um den Persischen Golf.
In dieser Situation war es unserer Einschätzung nach nicht mehr im Interesse vieler Regierungen und auch einflußreicher Teile der Industrie, diese Fragen für eine breite Öffentlichkeit (und insbesondere auch für die OPEC) weiterhin transparent zu machen. Also gab es in der Folge keine entsprechenden Untersuchungen mehr. Insbesondere wurde keine öffentlich zugängliche und verlässliche Datenbasis zu diesen Fragen aufgebaut. Zwar ist die Internationale Energieagentur (IEA) auf den Weg gebracht worden - diese Organsation hatte aber nur die Aufgabe, die kurzfristigen Entwicklungen zu beobachten. Von der OPEC wurde diese Organisation von Anfang an als gegen sie gerichtet verstanden.
Quelle: Die Grenzen des Wachstums, D. Meadows et al., dt. Ausgabe, Stuttgart, 1972
Global 2000, Der Bericht an den Präsidenten, dt. Ausgabe, Frankfurt, 1980
www.energiekrise.de
Herr Schröder : Solarer Wasserstoff sofort !
Denn OEL-Bush jr. wird ein Teil der Krise sein !
Wir haben keine Zeit zu verlieren !
PS auch SADDAM weiß es : OEL-EMBARGO genau zum richtigen Zeitpunkt !
Der Bericht an den US Präsidenten - Global 2000 , 1980 !!!
Oft wird argumentiert, alle früheren Vorhersagen über die Größe und die Reichweite der Erdölvorräte wären fehlerhaft gewesen. Entsprechend dieser Linie wird dann jede neue diesbezügliche Aussage als von vornherein ebenfalls von zweifelhafter Qualität hingestellt, vergleichbar den früheren Aussagen.
Tatsache ist jedoch, dass man spätestens seit den 70er Jahren weiß, dass das Maximum der Neufunde bereits in den 60er Jahren überschritten wurde (siehe z.B. die Folie Nr.1) - denn seit dieser Zeit geht der Trend beim Auffinden neuen Öls zurück. Spätestens ab diesem Zeitpunkt konnte man auch durch entsprechende Trendextrapolationen hinreichend verlässliche quantitative Aussagen wagen.
So haben sich weder die Aussagen des ersten Berichts des Club of Rome "Die Grenzen des Wachstums" aus dem Jahr 1972 bisher als vollkommen falsch erwiesen, noch erst recht die wesentlich detaillierteren und fundierteren Aussagen des 1980 erschienenen Berichtes "Global 2000" .
Im Gegenteil entsteht beim Wiederlesen der Analysen der Eindruck, dass man damals durchaus bereits in der Lage war, zu wissen, was man wissen wollte oder mußte.
Im Bericht des Club of Rome wurde die prinzipielle Unmöglichkeit eines anhaltenden exponentiellen materiellen Wachstums innerhalb eines begrenzten Systems diskutiert. Die Energierohstoffe bildeten dabei nur einen betrachteten Parameter unter mehreren. Beispielhaft wurde für Erdöl eine Quantifizierung durchgeführt. An Erdölreserven waren damals 72,5 km3 bekannt entsprechend 456 Gigabarrel. Beim damaligen Verbrauch hätte das einer statischen Reichweite von 31 Jahren entsprochen. In den Tabellen des Berichts wurde darüber hinaus angenommen, dass etwa die fünffache Menge an Erdöl insgesamt vorhanden ist. Das entspräche 2280 Gb und bei den damaligen Verbrauchswachstumsraten von 3,9 % p.a. einer dynamischen Reichweite von 50 Jahren.(Siehe dazu z.B. in der deutschen Ausgabe die Tabelle 4.)
Während "Die Grenzen des Wachstums" vor allem die prinzipiellen Zusammenhänge diskutierte, war des Anliegen des 1980 erschienenen Berichts "Global 2000", eine nach damaligem Wissen bestmögliche quantitative Beschreibung der künftigen Versorgungssituation mit Rohstoffen zu geben. Die Studie war vom damaligen US-Präsidenten Carter beauftragt worden und in mehrjähriger Arbeit von einem vielköpfigen Expertenteam (auch unter Einbeziehung externer Experten) erstellt worden. Erst nach dem bald folgenden Machtwechsel im Weißen Haus zum neuen Präsidenten Reagan wurde es schnell still um die Untersuchung. Statt dessen wurde der Sternenkrieg (SDI) als neue Herausforderung Amerikas begriffen.
In dem 1500 Seiten starken Werk finden sich zahlreiche Aussagen zur Verfügbarkeit von Erdöl. Die Basis der Aussagen bildete zum einen die für die Weltenergiekonferenz 1977 von einem Expertenteam erarbeitete Untersuchung "Report on Oil Ressources 1998-2020" und zum anderen die am MIT erarbeitete Studie "Energy Supply-Demand Integrations to the Year 2000". Diese Grundlagen wurden als bestmögliche Quellen benutzt.
Zusammenfassend heißt es in Global 2000 unter anderem:
"Darüber hinaus scheint bei der Erschließung neuer Erdölreserven die Erfolgsquote bezogen auf den jeweiligen Explorationsaufwand zu fallen"
(Seite 72 der deutschen Ausgabe)
sowie
"Obwohl diese Varianten für das Jahr 2000 zu verschiedenen Höchstproduktionsniveaus kommen, indizieren sie doch, daß die mögliche Nachfrage im Jahr 2000 wahrscheinlich nicht durch Rohölproduktion aus konventionellen Quellen gedeckt werden kann. Neue Ölfunde oder höhere Erschließungsraten können diesen Scheitelwert zwar um einige Jahre hinausschieben, würden aber den unvermeidlichen Rückgang der Ölreserven nicht verhindern." (Seite 415)
Nach Auffassung der damaligen Experten würde sich die "Recovery-Rate", also der Anteil des in einem Vorkommen insgesamt vorhandenen Öls, der wirklich aus dem Ölfeld entnommen werden kann, von 25 % im Jahr 1975 auf etwa 40 % im Jahr 2000 erhöhen (Seite 414). Tatsächlich betrug die Recovery-Rate der 200 größten Ölfelder nach einer Untersuchung von J. Laherrere aus dem Jahr 1998 etwa 40 % und stimmt also sehr gut mit der etwa 20 Jahre alten Prognose überein.
Die beiden nachfolgenden Grafiken sind aus dem Bericht "Global 2000" entnommen und wurden um die Darstellung der seither tatsächlich erfolgten Entwicklung ergänzt. Wie man sieht, stimmt die tatsächliche Entwicklung sehr gut mit den damaligen Prognosen überein.
Sowohl die Menge des insgesamt vorhandenen Erdöls (Estimated Ultimate Recovery), als auch die künftige maximal mögliche Förderrate der Erdölproduktion wurden damals sehr genau vorhergesagt und müssen bis heute nicht korrigiert werden.
Abbildung Kumulierte Erdölfunde und kumulierte Erdölproduktion. (kleine Tabelle siehe weiter unten)
Die Extrapolation wurde anhand der damals veröffentlichten Reservestatistiken erstellt. Damals wurden Höherbewertungen noch nicht rückdatiert, sondern dem Jahr der Höherbewertung zugeschrieben. Dies hatte zur Folge, dass der steile Anstieg der kumulierten Ölfunde gegen Ende wesentlich stärker zurückgeht.
Quelle: Global 2000, dt. Ausgabe, 1980
Die Zahlen in der Tabelle liegen in der Bandbreite der auch heute besten Zahlen. Dies ist unseres Wissens auch das letzte Mal gewesen, dass große Ölgesellschaften ihre eigenen Einschätzungen zur weltweiten Ressourcenlage offengelegt haben..
Abbildung Kurve des Produktionsmaximums in Abhängigkeit von unterschiedlichen Verbrauchszenarien
In der Studie "Global 2000" ging man davon aus, dass der Ölverbrauch mit einer Rate von 2 - 3 % p.a. , möglichweise sogar mit 5 % p.a. wachsen würde. Unter diesen Voraussetzungen war das Produktionsmaximum in den 90er Jahren, bzw. bei 5 % p.a. Wachstum Mitte der 80er Jahre zu erwarten, wobei die Maximalproduktion je nach Szenario zwischen 85 - 100 Mio Barrel Tagesproduktion gesehen wurde.
Tatsächlich entwickelte sich jedoch die Ölnachfrage wesentlich langsamer, nämlich seit 1975 im Mittel nur mit etwa 1,3 % p.a. . Unter dieser Voraussetzung ist das Produktionsmaximum um das Jahr 2002 bei etwa 80 Millionen Barrel Tagesproduktion zu erwarten. Diese Entwicklung wurde von energiekrise.de nachträglich in Rot in die Grafik eingetragen. Damit stimmt die alte Prognose aus dem Jahr 1980 bzw. 1977 mit den aktuellen Einschätzungen von Campbell, Laherrere, aber auch von Rubin (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce) und Magoon (US-Geological Survey) sehr gut überein. Man darf daher annehmen, dass Insider der Szene seit mehr als 20 Jahren sehr gut die Situation der Ölindustrie kennen.
Unseres Wissens war "Global 2000" die einzige jemals einer breiten Öffentlichkeit zugängliche ernsthafte Analyse der tatsächlichen Situation. Das Buch konnte damals in jeder Buchhandlung erworben werden. Bezeichnenderweise war dies auch die letzte derartige Veröffentlichung. Unsere Interpreation: Die Studie entstand als unmittelbare Reaktion auf die beiden Ölpreisschocks der 70er Jahre. In den darauf folgenden Jahren bildete sich dann immer mehr ein Interessenkonflikt heraus zwischen den Ölverbraucherstaaten - allen voran der USA - und den wesentlichen Ölförderländern - allen voran den Staaten um den Persischen Golf.
In dieser Situation war es unserer Einschätzung nach nicht mehr im Interesse vieler Regierungen und auch einflußreicher Teile der Industrie, diese Fragen für eine breite Öffentlichkeit (und insbesondere auch für die OPEC) weiterhin transparent zu machen. Also gab es in der Folge keine entsprechenden Untersuchungen mehr. Insbesondere wurde keine öffentlich zugängliche und verlässliche Datenbasis zu diesen Fragen aufgebaut. Zwar ist die Internationale Energieagentur (IEA) auf den Weg gebracht worden - diese Organsation hatte aber nur die Aufgabe, die kurzfristigen Entwicklungen zu beobachten. Von der OPEC wurde diese Organisation von Anfang an als gegen sie gerichtet verstanden.
Quelle: Die Grenzen des Wachstums, D. Meadows et al., dt. Ausgabe, Stuttgart, 1972
Global 2000, Der Bericht an den Präsidenten, dt. Ausgabe, Frankfurt, 1980
www.energiekrise.de
Herr Schröder : Solarer Wasserstoff sofort !
Denn OEL-Bush jr. wird ein Teil der Krise sein !
Wir haben keine Zeit zu verlieren !
PS auch SADDAM weiß es : OEL-EMBARGO genau zum richtigen Zeitpunkt !
Ergänzung :
http://www.energiekrise.de/news/forum/0102_baz_magaz.pdf PDF Reader erforderlich !
http://www.energiekrise.de/news/forum/0102_baz_magaz.pdf PDF Reader erforderlich !
Thema brandaktuell ! 
natürlich ist das rohoel endlich. aber selbst unsere kinder erleben das nicht mehr. es gibt noch genügend bekannte und auch unbekannte vorkommen. nur sie zu erschliessen ist noch zu teuer. auch die oelproduzierenden länder haben kapiert, dass man mit fertigprodukten mehr geld verdienen kann. denke doch mal an diese länder. das einzige was sie haben ist das oel. wenn die pumpen morgen nichts mehr bringen, gehen bei denen die lichter aus.
fazit also: sprit sparen und ökosteuer rauf.
fazit also: sprit sparen und ökosteuer rauf.
Opec-Iraq guessing game gets tougher for traders
London |Reuters | 16-06-2001
Print friendly format | Email to Friend
Oil traders and old hands at analysing the production game plans for Opec and Iraq find themselves with an even knottier conundrum than normal. At issue are the absent two million barrels per day of Iraqi crude under the United Nations oil-for-food programme and the timing and volume of any extra supply that Opec might release to replace the outage.
Iraq is mid-way through a minimum one-month stoppage to protest an Anglo-American proposal to revamp United Nations sanctions against Baghdad. The UN extended oil-for-food sales by 30 days to discuss a resolution that would lift restrictions on civilian goods, maintain a ban on military items and tighten border controls to check oil smuggling, Iraq`s vital hard currency earner.
If the UN Security Council does not reach an agreement by the July 3 deadline, it could drop the revamp altogether, renewing oil-for-food on the terms Iraq wants. That would likely see a return of Iraqi crude to the market.
Less likely, the UN could decide on another short-term extension on oil-for-food to keep negotiations on sanctions alive, probably keeping Iraqi oil sidelined. "Saddam (Hussein, Iraq`s president) is the focal point in the industry. People are trying to second guess him again," said Peter Gignoux of Schroder Salomon Smith Barney.
"If necessary he can extend it for longer than people think and as a function of that may starve the market," he added. Opec led by powerhouse producer Saudi Arabia, has kept cool, saying it is ready to step in to make up for any Iraqi stoppage.
But traders know all too well that Opec is happy with prices just where they are, at the upper end of the $22-$28 range for its basket of crudes. Benchmark Brent crude, worth a premium over the Opec basket, was trading in London at $28.18 a barrel yesterday.
Any response at Opec`s July 3 emergency meeting in Vienna might not deliver the volumes required to comfort major customers like the United States who want ample supplies at affordable prices.
After years of bickering over output quotas, a cohesive OPEC has its act together and has confidently deflected calls for more crude. The world`s biggest oil consumer, the United States, is also giving Opec more breathing space these days now that heavy handed U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson has been replaced.
The only thing that oil traders, Opec and consuming countries can do is wonder how long the Iraqi president is prepared to hold out if renewed sanctions do go through. Eleven years of sanctions, air strikes and political isolation have failed to bring a defiant Saddam Hussein to his knees and he is always willing to unload the oil weapon.
The Iraqi leader has even improved ties with Arab arch-enemy Syria, one way of keeping million of dollars in oil revenues flowing to state coffers. Iraq is maintaining illicit oil sales to Syria outside the UN sanctions despite Baghdad`s vow to cut off most exports in its latest confrontation with the UN, traders said.
"There`s no reason why Iraq should not stay out (of the market) indefinitely," said Geoff Pynne, an independent oil consultant. "Supposing you stayed out for a year. If there were a humanitarian crisis at the end of that period then the rest of the world would come along and blame the UN for sanctions and that would suit Saddam`s book fine," he said.
As Saddam, the master of brinksmanship, considers his options, oil market players face a host of other uncertainties such as the state of the U.S. economy, which will influence demand for oil in the months ahead.
The International Energy Agency has said surplus production capacity exceeds four million bpd in key producing states so physical capacity to replace the Iraqi shortfall exists. But the West`s energy watchdog pointed to longer term concerns, warning that the seasonal uptick in third and fourth quarter demand would require the attention of producers. The big question now is who has more patience.
"History shows that Saddam can survive an incredibly long time without oil income," said Lawrence Eagles of GNI Research. "His ultimate aim is to get sanctions lifted.
There is no better time than now.
Oil stocks are at a relatively low level, the world economy is vulnerable and non-Opec output is not expected to increase. The longer he delays the better."
Ich sagte es ja: es wird eng !
Solarer Wasserstoff/Biofuel jetzt ! Herr Schröder !
London |Reuters | 16-06-2001
Print friendly format | Email to Friend
Oil traders and old hands at analysing the production game plans for Opec and Iraq find themselves with an even knottier conundrum than normal. At issue are the absent two million barrels per day of Iraqi crude under the United Nations oil-for-food programme and the timing and volume of any extra supply that Opec might release to replace the outage.
Iraq is mid-way through a minimum one-month stoppage to protest an Anglo-American proposal to revamp United Nations sanctions against Baghdad. The UN extended oil-for-food sales by 30 days to discuss a resolution that would lift restrictions on civilian goods, maintain a ban on military items and tighten border controls to check oil smuggling, Iraq`s vital hard currency earner.
If the UN Security Council does not reach an agreement by the July 3 deadline, it could drop the revamp altogether, renewing oil-for-food on the terms Iraq wants. That would likely see a return of Iraqi crude to the market.
Less likely, the UN could decide on another short-term extension on oil-for-food to keep negotiations on sanctions alive, probably keeping Iraqi oil sidelined. "Saddam (Hussein, Iraq`s president) is the focal point in the industry. People are trying to second guess him again," said Peter Gignoux of Schroder Salomon Smith Barney.
"If necessary he can extend it for longer than people think and as a function of that may starve the market," he added. Opec led by powerhouse producer Saudi Arabia, has kept cool, saying it is ready to step in to make up for any Iraqi stoppage.
But traders know all too well that Opec is happy with prices just where they are, at the upper end of the $22-$28 range for its basket of crudes. Benchmark Brent crude, worth a premium over the Opec basket, was trading in London at $28.18 a barrel yesterday.
Any response at Opec`s July 3 emergency meeting in Vienna might not deliver the volumes required to comfort major customers like the United States who want ample supplies at affordable prices.
After years of bickering over output quotas, a cohesive OPEC has its act together and has confidently deflected calls for more crude. The world`s biggest oil consumer, the United States, is also giving Opec more breathing space these days now that heavy handed U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson has been replaced.
The only thing that oil traders, Opec and consuming countries can do is wonder how long the Iraqi president is prepared to hold out if renewed sanctions do go through. Eleven years of sanctions, air strikes and political isolation have failed to bring a defiant Saddam Hussein to his knees and he is always willing to unload the oil weapon.
The Iraqi leader has even improved ties with Arab arch-enemy Syria, one way of keeping million of dollars in oil revenues flowing to state coffers. Iraq is maintaining illicit oil sales to Syria outside the UN sanctions despite Baghdad`s vow to cut off most exports in its latest confrontation with the UN, traders said.
"There`s no reason why Iraq should not stay out (of the market) indefinitely," said Geoff Pynne, an independent oil consultant. "Supposing you stayed out for a year. If there were a humanitarian crisis at the end of that period then the rest of the world would come along and blame the UN for sanctions and that would suit Saddam`s book fine," he said.
As Saddam, the master of brinksmanship, considers his options, oil market players face a host of other uncertainties such as the state of the U.S. economy, which will influence demand for oil in the months ahead.
The International Energy Agency has said surplus production capacity exceeds four million bpd in key producing states so physical capacity to replace the Iraqi shortfall exists. But the West`s energy watchdog pointed to longer term concerns, warning that the seasonal uptick in third and fourth quarter demand would require the attention of producers. The big question now is who has more patience.
"History shows that Saddam can survive an incredibly long time without oil income," said Lawrence Eagles of GNI Research. "His ultimate aim is to get sanctions lifted.
There is no better time than now. Oil stocks are at a relatively low level, the world economy is vulnerable and non-Opec output is not expected to increase. The longer he delays the better."
Ich sagte es ja: es wird eng !
Solarer Wasserstoff/Biofuel jetzt ! Herr Schröder !
Trading Spotlight
The California Hydrogen Business Council
June 26, 2001
"The present energy crisis would not exist if alternative energy technologies had been developed and deployed earlier; unfortunately, it seems that it takes a crisis -- in this case, rolling blackouts, steep oil and gas prices, and global warming -- to move America to action. Now that the crisis is upon us, it`s time to seize the opportunity to deploy new power technologies to address these challenges and create a whole new energy future.
...The burning of fossil fuels is like taking a powerful drug; it may be what is temporarily required for our economic well being, but it has severe side effects -- it contributes to air pollution and global warming, it presents tanker and pipeline transport hazards; moreover, importing so much of our oil supply negatively affects our balance of payments and requires massive defense spending to ensure continued supply.
There is another concern which we too often ignore: at some point in the future, we will have to start burning less oil and conserving more because oil is an irreplaceable source of petrochemical feedstocks for future generations who will continue to need plastics, epoxies and carbon fibers. No other materials, natural or man-made, are available to take the place of petrochemical feedstocks -- which took millions of years to be created -- once they are exhausted."
-- Edward W. Furia, the first Regional Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the Middle Atlantic States, now chairman and chief executive officer of (flywheel energy storage
Es ist alles gesagt ! Herr Schröder !handeln Sie endlich !
Bevor es zu spät ist !
June 26, 2001
"The present energy crisis would not exist if alternative energy technologies had been developed and deployed earlier; unfortunately, it seems that it takes a crisis -- in this case, rolling blackouts, steep oil and gas prices, and global warming -- to move America to action. Now that the crisis is upon us, it`s time to seize the opportunity to deploy new power technologies to address these challenges and create a whole new energy future.
...The burning of fossil fuels is like taking a powerful drug; it may be what is temporarily required for our economic well being, but it has severe side effects -- it contributes to air pollution and global warming, it presents tanker and pipeline transport hazards; moreover, importing so much of our oil supply negatively affects our balance of payments and requires massive defense spending to ensure continued supply.
There is another concern which we too often ignore: at some point in the future, we will have to start burning less oil and conserving more because oil is an irreplaceable source of petrochemical feedstocks for future generations who will continue to need plastics, epoxies and carbon fibers. No other materials, natural or man-made, are available to take the place of petrochemical feedstocks -- which took millions of years to be created -- once they are exhausted."
-- Edward W. Furia, the first Regional Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the Middle Atlantic States, now chairman and chief executive officer of (flywheel energy storage
Es ist alles gesagt ! Herr Schröder !handeln Sie endlich !
Bevor es zu spät ist !
Der oelpreis will nach oben ! Da gibt es kein Wenn und kein Aber Nachfrage steigt kontinuierlich s.o. und das Angebot fällt :
Das teure Oel zieht uns in den Abgrund !
Das teure Oel zieht uns in den Abgrund !
Der teure Oelpreis zieht uns keineswegs in den Abgrund. Vielmehr war es bisher immer zu billig.
The Guardian Online - http://www.ngrguardiannews.com
Sunday, August 5, 2001
Nigeria To Exhaust Oil Reserves In 29 Years
BY AMBROSE AKOR
POLITICAL REPORTER
NIGERIA`S oil reserves are to be exhausted in 29 years time, a British Petroleum (BP) report has said.
The recent report, which was carried out by BP to ascertain the quantity of oil reserves available worldwide and how long it would take to exhaust them, indicates that Nigeria has 22 billion barrels of oil untapped.
According to the report, it would take 29 years to exhaust these "proven reserves" available in the country if the current production level would be maintained.
Recent Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) reports show that 27.8 million barrels of crude oil was purchased from the federation during the first quarter of 2001.
By 1958 when commercial production of petroleum began, Nigeria was producing oil at the rate of 4,000 barrels per day and exporting the same from Port Harcourt.
By independence in 1960, Nigeria was producing 17,000 barrels per day.
Oil production in Nigeria, shortly after it joined the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in July 1971, was vigorously pursued and production in 1974 reached an all-time high of 2.2 million barrels per day.
A number of times, production levels rose or fell either because of drop in oil prices or for cutbacks ordered by OPEC.
According to the BP report, members of the OPEC cartel jointly have 815 billion barrels amounting to three-quarters of proven reserves worldwide.
The economically advanced countries, which use most of the world`s oil, have less than one-tenth of the world`s total reserves.
Saudi Arabia is the kingpin, singly having a quarter of the world`s proven reserves, amounting to 262 billion barrels, which is expected to last for 181 years.
Of all countries, Libya has the highest reserves of 26 billion barrels which by current production levels is expected to last for 55 years.
Nigeria is second to Libya in Africa but appears to be less economical with its reserves as its oil deposit which is only four billion barrels less than Libya`s is expected to be exhausted 24 years before Libya exhausts its reserves.
Algeria`s proven reserves of 10 billion barrels, according to the report, is expected to last for17 years.
Angola with seven billion barrels of oil in proven reserves is expected to exhaust its deposits in20 years. Oil took over from agricultural products as the premier export for Angola in 1973,
The BP report shows Venezuela as having 78 billion barrels in reserve and it is expected to exhaust the reserves in 66 years.
Iran with 85 billion barrels in proven reserves will equally produce until 66 years.
Kuwait has 97 billion barrels and United Arab Emirate 98 billion barrels but both have their reserves lasting for over a hundred years.
Some other countries mentioned in the report and their proven reserves include Indonesia with five billion barrels lasting 10 years; Britain with six billion barrels lastingfive years; Canada with eight billion barrels lasting
nine years and Azerbaijan with nine billion barrels lasting 63 years.
Others are Brazil with 10 billion barrels lasting18 years; Kazakhstan with 10 billion barrels lasting 31 years; Norway with 12 billion barrels lasting eight years; China with 23 billion barrels lasting 20 years and Mexico with 25 billion barrels lasting 24 years.
The United States has 30 billion barrels of proven reserves and by its current production level the reserves will last for 10 years and Russia has 44 billion barrels in reserves which is going to last for 21 years.
A number of times before, global oil crises have reduced world oil production levels. Such an event is expected to affect the projections.
Global oil crisis reduced production in Nigeria from 2.10 million barrels per day in 1977 to 1.5 million barrels per day in February 1978.
GuARDIAN SERVER:7Sunday:Text:Oil P.1 5/8/2k1 Ngozika
Noch max. 20 Jahre um vom Oel weg zu kommen !
Oelreserven aufgebraucht in Nordafrika Nordamerika und Europa :
Norwegen !
Russland !
England !
USA !!!!!
Kanada
Angola
Algerien
Indonesien !!
China !!!!
Brasilien !!
Quelle BP !!!!!!
Unglaublich unsere Politiker schlafen ........
Nur noch 20 Jahre um die gesamte Wirtschaft umzustellen !
Wo wir doch 100 Jahre gebraucht haben um die Oelwirtschaft in Ihrer heutigen Form aufzubauen !
Solarer Wasserstoff Biofuel jetzt Herr Schröder !
Sunday, August 5, 2001
Nigeria To Exhaust Oil Reserves In 29 Years
BY AMBROSE AKOR
POLITICAL REPORTER
NIGERIA`S oil reserves are to be exhausted in 29 years time, a British Petroleum (BP) report has said.
The recent report, which was carried out by BP to ascertain the quantity of oil reserves available worldwide and how long it would take to exhaust them, indicates that Nigeria has 22 billion barrels of oil untapped.
According to the report, it would take 29 years to exhaust these "proven reserves" available in the country if the current production level would be maintained.
Recent Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) reports show that 27.8 million barrels of crude oil was purchased from the federation during the first quarter of 2001.
By 1958 when commercial production of petroleum began, Nigeria was producing oil at the rate of 4,000 barrels per day and exporting the same from Port Harcourt.
By independence in 1960, Nigeria was producing 17,000 barrels per day.
Oil production in Nigeria, shortly after it joined the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in July 1971, was vigorously pursued and production in 1974 reached an all-time high of 2.2 million barrels per day.
A number of times, production levels rose or fell either because of drop in oil prices or for cutbacks ordered by OPEC.
According to the BP report, members of the OPEC cartel jointly have 815 billion barrels amounting to three-quarters of proven reserves worldwide.
The economically advanced countries, which use most of the world`s oil, have less than one-tenth of the world`s total reserves. Saudi Arabia is the kingpin, singly having a quarter of the world`s proven reserves, amounting to 262 billion barrels, which is expected to last for 181 years.
Of all countries, Libya has the highest reserves of 26 billion barrels which by current production levels is expected to last for 55 years.
Nigeria is second to Libya in Africa but appears to be less economical with its reserves as its oil deposit which is only four billion barrels less than Libya`s is expected to be exhausted
24 years before Libya exhausts its reserves.Algeria`s proven reserves of 10 billion barrels, according to the report, is expected to last for
17 years.Angola with seven billion barrels of oil in proven reserves is expected to exhaust its deposits in
20 years. Oil took over from agricultural products as the premier export for Angola in 1973,The BP report shows Venezuela as having 78 billion barrels in reserve and it is expected to exhaust the reserves in 66 years.
Iran with 85 billion barrels in proven reserves will equally produce until 66 years.
Kuwait has 97 billion barrels and United Arab Emirate 98 billion barrels but both have their reserves lasting for over a hundred years.
Some other countries mentioned in the report and their proven reserves include Indonesia with five billion barrels lasting 10 years; Britain with six billion barrels lasting
five years; Canada with eight billion barrels lasting nine years and Azerbaijan with nine billion barrels lasting 63 years.Others are Brazil with 10 billion barrels lasting
18 years; Kazakhstan with 10 billion barrels lasting 31 years; Norway with 12 billion barrels lasting eight years; China with 23 billion barrels lasting 20 years and Mexico with 25 billion barrels lasting 24 years.The United States has 30 billion barrels of proven reserves and by its current production level the reserves will last for 10 years and Russia has 44 billion barrels in reserves which is going to last for
21 years.A number of times before, global oil crises have reduced world oil production levels. Such an event is expected to affect the projections.
Global oil crisis reduced production in Nigeria from 2.10 million barrels per day in 1977 to 1.5 million barrels per day in February 1978.
GuARDIAN SERVER:7Sunday:Text:Oil P.1 5/8/2k1 Ngozika
Noch max. 20 Jahre um vom Oel weg zu kommen !
Oelreserven aufgebraucht in Nordafrika Nordamerika und Europa :
Norwegen !
Russland !
England !
USA !!!!!
Kanada
Angola
Algerien
Indonesien !!
China !!!!
Brasilien !!
Quelle BP !!!!!!
Unglaublich unsere Politiker schlafen ........
Nur noch 20 Jahre um die gesamte Wirtschaft umzustellen !
Wo wir doch 100 Jahre gebraucht haben um die Oelwirtschaft in Ihrer heutigen Form aufzubauen !
Solarer Wasserstoff Biofuel jetzt Herr Schröder !
U.S. Natural Gas Prices Rise 18.75% In March on Colder Weather and Future Supply Concerns, According to Platts
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 7, 2002--Average U.S. monthly natural gas spot prices for March rose 18.75% from February, to $2.28/MMBtu, as cold weather swooped into the South and East, and forecasts for tighter supplies later this year fueled stronger price expectations, according to data released by Platts, the energy information, research, consulting and marketing services business of The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE: MHP - news).
In an exclusive survey by Inside FERC`s Gas Market Report, whose spot price surveys set the benchmark prices for most monthly spot contracts in North America, the average price of natural gas delivered to the premium New York and New Jersey markets for March was $2.76/MMBtu, compared with $2.58/MMBtu in February and $5.63/MMBtu in March 2001.
In Southern California, where the monthly average reached $12.53/MMBtu in March 2001, the average monthly spot price for March 2002 was just $2.28/MMBtu, up 12.87% from $2.02/MMBtu in February. The March average is 81.8% below the March 2001 level.
``A number of factors combined to inject a jolt of bullishness into the March market,`` said Kelley Doolan, natural gas market specialist for Platts and chief editor of Inside FERC`s Gas Market Report. ``Many areas of the South and East that have not seen much winter this year finally got a shot of seasonable or below-normal temperatures this week. Additionally, there were a number of analysts` reports issued in late February that projected a strengthening of prices in the second half of 2002, largely due to anticipated production declines and a rebound in gas demand as the economy improves.``
``Even though there is still an unprecedented amount of gas in storage for this time of year and no supply shortfalls on the near-term horizon, the specter of a return to a tight supply/demand environment later this year was enough to shift the prevailing bearish market psychology,`` Doolan said. ``Consequently, forward prices for gas futures shifted higher too.``
On Mar. 5, the average price for gas futures contracts for the coming 12 months-- an indication of the marketplace`s price expectations-- was $2.865/MMBtu, up 14.5% from the $2.502/MMBtu average on Feb. 4, and down 47.42% from the $5.449/MMBtu average on Mar. 5, 2001, when price expectations were far more bullish than now.
These and other Platts energy prices can be charted at no cost at www.platts.com.
Platts is the world`s largest and most authoritative provider of energy information and marketing services, with 16 offices worldwide. Products now range from real-time and Internet-based news and price assessment services, to newsletters, market reports, databases, magazines, conferences, research services, geospatial tools and consulting. Platts offerings cover the oil, petrochemical, natural gas, electricity, nuclear power, coal and metals markets. Every day, more than $10 billion of trading activity and term contract sales are based on Platts` price assessments. Additional information is available at www.platts.com and www.plattsmetals.com.
Founded in 1888, The McGraw-Hill Companies is a global information services provider meeting worldwide needs in the financial services, education and business information markets through leading brands such as Standard & Poor`s, BusinessWeek and McGraw-Hill Education. The Corporation has more than 300 offices in 33 countries. Sales in 2001 were $4.6 billion. Additional information is available at www.mcgraw-hill.com.
Gaspreise werden um 200% steigen !
Oelpreise weit über 30 $ IRAK Krieg !
Nordsee OEL geht zu Ende ! 2010 NULL !
Neue dramatische Erkenntnisse u.a. Australische Studie hier !
http://www.energiekrise.de
23 $ ++
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 7, 2002--Average U.S. monthly natural gas spot prices for March rose 18.75% from February, to $2.28/MMBtu, as cold weather swooped into the South and East, and forecasts for tighter supplies later this year fueled stronger price expectations, according to data released by Platts, the energy information, research, consulting and marketing services business of The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE: MHP - news).
In an exclusive survey by Inside FERC`s Gas Market Report, whose spot price surveys set the benchmark prices for most monthly spot contracts in North America, the average price of natural gas delivered to the premium New York and New Jersey markets for March was $2.76/MMBtu, compared with $2.58/MMBtu in February and $5.63/MMBtu in March 2001.
In Southern California, where the monthly average reached $12.53/MMBtu in March 2001, the average monthly spot price for March 2002 was just $2.28/MMBtu, up 12.87% from $2.02/MMBtu in February. The March average is 81.8% below the March 2001 level.
``A number of factors combined to inject a jolt of bullishness into the March market,`` said Kelley Doolan, natural gas market specialist for Platts and chief editor of Inside FERC`s Gas Market Report. ``Many areas of the South and East that have not seen much winter this year finally got a shot of seasonable or below-normal temperatures this week. Additionally, there were a number of analysts` reports issued in late February that projected a strengthening of prices in the second half of 2002, largely due to anticipated production declines and a rebound in gas demand as the economy improves.``
``Even though there is still an unprecedented amount of gas in storage for this time of year and no supply shortfalls on the near-term horizon, the specter of a return to a tight supply/demand environment later this year was enough to shift the prevailing bearish market psychology,`` Doolan said. ``Consequently, forward prices for gas futures shifted higher too.``
On Mar. 5, the average price for gas futures contracts for the coming 12 months-- an indication of the marketplace`s price expectations-- was $2.865/MMBtu, up 14.5% from the $2.502/MMBtu average on Feb. 4, and down 47.42% from the $5.449/MMBtu average on Mar. 5, 2001, when price expectations were far more bullish than now.
These and other Platts energy prices can be charted at no cost at www.platts.com.
Platts is the world`s largest and most authoritative provider of energy information and marketing services, with 16 offices worldwide. Products now range from real-time and Internet-based news and price assessment services, to newsletters, market reports, databases, magazines, conferences, research services, geospatial tools and consulting. Platts offerings cover the oil, petrochemical, natural gas, electricity, nuclear power, coal and metals markets. Every day, more than $10 billion of trading activity and term contract sales are based on Platts` price assessments. Additional information is available at www.platts.com and www.plattsmetals.com.
Founded in 1888, The McGraw-Hill Companies is a global information services provider meeting worldwide needs in the financial services, education and business information markets through leading brands such as Standard & Poor`s, BusinessWeek and McGraw-Hill Education. The Corporation has more than 300 offices in 33 countries. Sales in 2001 were $4.6 billion. Additional information is available at www.mcgraw-hill.com.
Gaspreise werden um 200% steigen !
Oelpreise weit über 30 $ IRAK Krieg !
Nordsee OEL geht zu Ende ! 2010 NULL !
Neue dramatische Erkenntnisse u.a. Australische Studie hier !
http://www.energiekrise.de
23 $ ++
US GAS Oil :
Benzinpreise vom 1,50 € keine Utopie mehr !
Benzinpreise vom 1,50 € keine Utopie mehr !
@m-b-s
du schreibst immer wieder die selbe scheiße.
es ist wie bei göbbels. den müll des club of rome von 1970 habe ich dir doch schon oft genug vorgehalten.
les den scheiß doch nochmal und vergleich ihn mit der realität heute.
wenn es nach denen geht haben wir schon seit 3 jahren kein öl mehr.
das papier ist nichtmal für den arsch als klopapier verwendbar.
die einzigen die dran verdient haben waren die herren prof.schriftsteller.
ich hab ean die lügenbibel damals auch geglaubt.
nochmal unsere vorräte reichen bei jetzigen verbauch für die nächsten 5000 jahre.
ließ meinen letzten tread und untersucheungen über den ölschiefer in kanada.
und das bei gewinnungskosten von ca. 11 dollar/barrel.
ich weiß das das nicht in deine ideologie paßt. aber nach dem motto zu leben es kann nicht sein was nicht sein darf ist ja wohl auch totaler blödsinn.
warum versuchst du die leute zu belügen und zu betrügen??????
so long1
du schreibst immer wieder die selbe scheiße.
es ist wie bei göbbels. den müll des club of rome von 1970 habe ich dir doch schon oft genug vorgehalten.
les den scheiß doch nochmal und vergleich ihn mit der realität heute.
wenn es nach denen geht haben wir schon seit 3 jahren kein öl mehr.
das papier ist nichtmal für den arsch als klopapier verwendbar.
die einzigen die dran verdient haben waren die herren prof.schriftsteller.
ich hab ean die lügenbibel damals auch geglaubt.
nochmal unsere vorräte reichen bei jetzigen verbauch für die nächsten 5000 jahre.
ließ meinen letzten tread und untersucheungen über den ölschiefer in kanada.
und das bei gewinnungskosten von ca. 11 dollar/barrel.
ich weiß das das nicht in deine ideologie paßt. aber nach dem motto zu leben es kann nicht sein was nicht sein darf ist ja wohl auch totaler blödsinn.
warum versuchst du die leute zu belügen und zu betrügen??????
so long1
Wien (Reuters) - Die Organisation Erdöl exportierender Länder (Opec) hat am Freitag in Wien wie erwartet ihre Beschränkung der Ölexporte zumindest bis Mitte Juni auf täglich 21,7 Millionen Barrel beibehalten, um den Ölpreis zu stabilisieren. Die Minister hätten die Vereinbarung ratifiziert, sagte der iranische Ölminister Bidschan Sanganeh.
"Der Preis hat derzeit gerade erst das untere Ende unserer Bandbreite überstiegen und wir hoffen, dass er anzieht, sobald sich die Wirtschaft erholt", sagte der venezolanische Ölminister Alvaro Silva. Die Opec strebt einen Ölpreis je Barrel (1 Barrel = 159 Liter) von 22 bis 28 Dollar an. Der Korbpreis für die sieben Opec-Ölsorten, der nach den Anschlägen am 11. September bis auf 16 Dollar gesunken war, war am Donnerstag bei 22,79 Dollar ermittelt worden.
Die Mitgliedstaaten einigten sich darauf, Mitte Juni ihre Strategie für die Preis- und Förderpolitik für das zweite Halbjahr festzulegen, sagte der kuwaitische Minister Ahmad El Fahd El Sabah. Analysten erwarten, dass die weiteren Entscheidungen zur Produktionsmenge von der Entwicklung der Weltwirtschaft abhängen werden. "Die Opec muss ein heikles Gleichgewicht halten - sie muss eine wachsende Weltwirtschaft mit genügend Öl versorgen, ohne niedrigere Preise zu riskieren", sagte Gary Ross von der New Yorker Energieberatung Pira Energy.
Nach Einschätzung des algerischen Ölministers Chakib Chelil ist bis zum Juni-Treffen noch nicht eine so starke Konjunkturbelebung zu erwarten, dass die Fördermenge schon erhöht werden müsste. Auch Opec-Präsident Rilwanu Lukman sieht dazu derzeit keine Notwendigkeit.
FÜNF MILLIONEN BARREL PRO TAG FÖRDERRESERVE
Mit der aktuellen Förderbegrenzung hat die Opec nach Experteneinschätzung freie Kapazitätsreserve von rund fünf Millionen Barrel pro Tag (bpd) in einem Weltmarkt von 75 Millionen bpd. Damit könnten auch möglich Förderausfälle des Irak gedeckt werden, falls die USA, wie spekuliert wird, militärisch gegen den Irak vorgingen, hieß es. Unter UNO-Überwachung kann der Irak bis zu rund 2,5 Millionen bpd Öl im Tausch gegen humanitäre Güter exportieren.
Am 1. Januar hatte die Opec gemeinsam mit Russland, Norwegen, Mexiko und anderen nicht dem Ölkartell angehörende Förderländer ihre Ölausfuhren um zusammen knapp zwei Millionen Barrel täglich reduziert, um den Preis wieder über 22 Dollar zu steigern. Mexiko, Norwegen und Oman haben eine Fortsetzung der Öl-Exportbeschränkungen bereits zugesagt.
Ein Barrel der führenden Nordsee-Ölsorte Brent zur Lieferung im Mai notierte am Freitagabend in London 0,07 Dollar niedriger mit 24,60 Dollar.
VERBRAUCHERLÄNDER SORGEN SICH UM KONJUNKTUR
In den Verbraucherländern hoffen indessen Analysten, dass die Opec die Exportbeschränkungen nicht zu lange beibehält und damit durch hohe Ölpreise die Inflation in den Industriestaaten anheizt. Dies könnte die beginnende Konjunkturbelebung abwürgen. "Der Rückgang der Ölpreise nach dem 11. September war eine starke Stimulierung der Verbrauchernachfrage. Wenn der Sommer kommt und wir hohe Benzinpreise haben, wird das den amerikanischen Verbrauchern wieder alles Geld aus der Tasche ziehen", sagte Sarah Emerson vom Bostoner Haus Energy Security Analysis. Roger Diwan vom Beratungsunternehmen Petroleum Finance Corp in Washington fügte hinzu: "Wenn sie (die Opec) keine Wiederholung des Jahres 2000 erleben wollen, als die Preise außer Kontrolle gerieten, müssen sie im dritten Quartal die Ölexporte um mindestens eine Million bpd erhöhen".
Natürlich wollen wir keine hohen Oelpreise sagen die Scheichs .......... Der Wolf zum Schaf .........
Weg vom Oel ! Herr Schroeder
Solarer Wasserstoff sonst wird das nichts mit der Wahl :
Auto Mob vorm Kanzleramt im Herbst !
"Der Preis hat derzeit gerade erst das untere Ende unserer Bandbreite überstiegen und wir hoffen, dass er anzieht, sobald sich die Wirtschaft erholt", sagte der venezolanische Ölminister Alvaro Silva. Die Opec strebt einen Ölpreis je Barrel (1 Barrel = 159 Liter) von 22 bis 28 Dollar an. Der Korbpreis für die sieben Opec-Ölsorten, der nach den Anschlägen am 11. September bis auf 16 Dollar gesunken war, war am Donnerstag bei 22,79 Dollar ermittelt worden.
Die Mitgliedstaaten einigten sich darauf, Mitte Juni ihre Strategie für die Preis- und Förderpolitik für das zweite Halbjahr festzulegen, sagte der kuwaitische Minister Ahmad El Fahd El Sabah. Analysten erwarten, dass die weiteren Entscheidungen zur Produktionsmenge von der Entwicklung der Weltwirtschaft abhängen werden. "Die Opec muss ein heikles Gleichgewicht halten - sie muss eine wachsende Weltwirtschaft mit genügend Öl versorgen, ohne niedrigere Preise zu riskieren", sagte Gary Ross von der New Yorker Energieberatung Pira Energy.
Nach Einschätzung des algerischen Ölministers Chakib Chelil ist bis zum Juni-Treffen noch nicht eine so starke Konjunkturbelebung zu erwarten, dass die Fördermenge schon erhöht werden müsste. Auch Opec-Präsident Rilwanu Lukman sieht dazu derzeit keine Notwendigkeit.
FÜNF MILLIONEN BARREL PRO TAG FÖRDERRESERVE
Mit der aktuellen Förderbegrenzung hat die Opec nach Experteneinschätzung freie Kapazitätsreserve von rund fünf Millionen Barrel pro Tag (bpd) in einem Weltmarkt von 75 Millionen bpd. Damit könnten auch möglich Förderausfälle des Irak gedeckt werden, falls die USA, wie spekuliert wird, militärisch gegen den Irak vorgingen, hieß es. Unter UNO-Überwachung kann der Irak bis zu rund 2,5 Millionen bpd Öl im Tausch gegen humanitäre Güter exportieren.
Am 1. Januar hatte die Opec gemeinsam mit Russland, Norwegen, Mexiko und anderen nicht dem Ölkartell angehörende Förderländer ihre Ölausfuhren um zusammen knapp zwei Millionen Barrel täglich reduziert, um den Preis wieder über 22 Dollar zu steigern. Mexiko, Norwegen und Oman haben eine Fortsetzung der Öl-Exportbeschränkungen bereits zugesagt.
Ein Barrel der führenden Nordsee-Ölsorte Brent zur Lieferung im Mai notierte am Freitagabend in London 0,07 Dollar niedriger mit 24,60 Dollar.
VERBRAUCHERLÄNDER SORGEN SICH UM KONJUNKTUR
In den Verbraucherländern hoffen indessen Analysten, dass die Opec die Exportbeschränkungen nicht zu lange beibehält und damit durch hohe Ölpreise die Inflation in den Industriestaaten anheizt. Dies könnte die beginnende Konjunkturbelebung abwürgen. "Der Rückgang der Ölpreise nach dem 11. September war eine starke Stimulierung der Verbrauchernachfrage. Wenn der Sommer kommt und wir hohe Benzinpreise haben, wird das den amerikanischen Verbrauchern wieder alles Geld aus der Tasche ziehen", sagte Sarah Emerson vom Bostoner Haus Energy Security Analysis. Roger Diwan vom Beratungsunternehmen Petroleum Finance Corp in Washington fügte hinzu: "Wenn sie (die Opec) keine Wiederholung des Jahres 2000 erleben wollen, als die Preise außer Kontrolle gerieten, müssen sie im dritten Quartal die Ölexporte um mindestens eine Million bpd erhöhen".
Natürlich wollen wir keine hohen Oelpreise sagen die Scheichs .......... Der Wolf zum Schaf .........
Weg vom Oel ! Herr Schroeder
Solarer Wasserstoff sonst wird das nichts mit der Wahl :
Auto Mob vorm Kanzleramt im Herbst !
MBS,
Dein Anliegen, die Ölwirtschaft durch die Wasserstoffwirtschaft zu ersetzen, mag zwar prinzipiell richtig sein, aber wie Du es hier vorbringst, ist prinzipiell falsch.
Es ist keine Religion oder Weltanschauung, sondern einfach nur eine neue Technologie. Sie wird Dir kein Seelenheil oder die Auferstehung bringen. Und Deine Aufforderungen an Schröder sind einfach nur nervig. Er liest diesen Thread bestimmt nicht.
Realitätsbezogene Sachdiskussion wäre also wesentlich hilfreicher. Fakt ist, daß die Ölwirtschaft nicht einfach so ersetzt werden kann. Fakt ist auch, daß die Ölvorräte wesentlich länger reichen als gedacht. Allein die neu entdeckten Vorräte in Sibirien reichen noch eine Ewigkeit! In Russland wird noch Öl gefördert, wenn bei den Arabern die Pumpen schon längst trocken sind.
Es wird also solange Öl verbraucht werden, bis es eine Technologie gibt, die wirtschaftlicher ist, sprich, die den Energiekonzernen höhere Profite erlaubt.
Ich sehe gute Chancen für die Brennstoffzelle. Das könnte ein richtiger Knüller werden. Aber dafür braucht es keine dummen Sprüche von Dir.
Wenn Du also ernsthaft eine Diskussion möchtest, dann bitte mehr echte Information, die auch was taugt. Sonst nimmt Dich bald niemand mehr ernst.
Dein Anliegen, die Ölwirtschaft durch die Wasserstoffwirtschaft zu ersetzen, mag zwar prinzipiell richtig sein, aber wie Du es hier vorbringst, ist prinzipiell falsch.
Es ist keine Religion oder Weltanschauung, sondern einfach nur eine neue Technologie. Sie wird Dir kein Seelenheil oder die Auferstehung bringen. Und Deine Aufforderungen an Schröder sind einfach nur nervig. Er liest diesen Thread bestimmt nicht.
Realitätsbezogene Sachdiskussion wäre also wesentlich hilfreicher. Fakt ist, daß die Ölwirtschaft nicht einfach so ersetzt werden kann. Fakt ist auch, daß die Ölvorräte wesentlich länger reichen als gedacht. Allein die neu entdeckten Vorräte in Sibirien reichen noch eine Ewigkeit! In Russland wird noch Öl gefördert, wenn bei den Arabern die Pumpen schon längst trocken sind.
Es wird also solange Öl verbraucht werden, bis es eine Technologie gibt, die wirtschaftlicher ist, sprich, die den Energiekonzernen höhere Profite erlaubt.
Ich sehe gute Chancen für die Brennstoffzelle. Das könnte ein richtiger Knüller werden. Aber dafür braucht es keine dummen Sprüche von Dir.
Wenn Du also ernsthaft eine Diskussion möchtest, dann bitte mehr echte Information, die auch was taugt. Sonst nimmt Dich bald niemand mehr ernst.
Das ewig gleiche nervige Gelaberre von M_B_S nimmt sowieso kein einigermaßen gebildeter Mensch ernst.
Gruß Jack.
Gruß Jack.
Meinst DU ?
Wie ernst die Lage ist werder Ihr noch dieses Jahr erleben wenn in Californien wieder die Lichter ausgehen und in Europa der Automob tobt bei Oelpreisen von weit über 30 $ und brennenden irakischen Oelfeldern !
Wie ernst die Lage ist werder Ihr noch dieses Jahr erleben wenn in Californien wieder die Lichter ausgehen und in Europa der Automob tobt
bei Oelpreisen von weit über 30 $ und brennenden irakischen Oelfeldern !
http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/hive/Deutsch/Oelkri…
Sachverständige beraten Bundesregierung !
Sachverständige beraten Bundesregierung !
US Gaspreise auf dem Weg die Rekordstände von 2000 zu toppen !
http://www.futuresource.com/charts/charts.asp?type=future%2C…
Die Krise sie kommt unaufhaltsam !
http://www.futuresource.com/charts/charts.asp?type=future%2C…
Die Krise sie kommt unaufhaltsam !
Aufgrund einer Rekord Hitzewelle in Californien drohen erneut wie im Krisenjahr 2000 Black Outs in der Stromversorgung !
Die psychologischen und wirtschaftlichen Folgen werden die USA erneut erschüttern !
Gas OEL und Strompreise ziehen bereits dramatisch an !
Die psychologischen und wirtschaftlichen Folgen werden die USA erneut erschüttern !
Gas OEL und Strompreise ziehen bereits dramatisch an !
NEW YORK — U.S. crude oil stocks fell last week to their lowest level since at least 1982 and now stand over 10 percent below a year ago as the northern winter and potential conflict in the Middle East loom, U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) statistics released Wednesday show.
U.S. crude stocks fell 10 million barrels to 275.2 million barrels after Tropical Storm Isidore shut in as much as 1.4 million barrels per day of offshore oil production for several days last week in the Gulf of Mexico.
Another storm, the stronger Hurricane Lili, is now plowing the same course as Isidore and could create even more disruption to U.S. oil production this week, forecasters said Wednesday.
Companies have already shut in supply and the nation`s main oil import terminal off Louisiana has halted operations.
"This will put bullish pressure on crude inventories next week, compounding Isidore`s effect. Another disruption this week will make it difficult for crude imports to catch up," said Washington`s Petroleum Finance Co. in a report.
BASEMENT LEVELS
Stocks are now approaching the 270 million barrels level which the National Petroleum Council says could result in supply problems if inventories stay that scarce during a period of strong demand such as a cold winter.
"Should the winter be as mild as last year, all should be fine, but if the winter is even just normal then we currently are heading for a problem," said Paul Horsnell of JP Morgan in a report.
On Tuesday, the American Petroleum Institute`s (API) report indicated an even bigger drawdown in crude supplies than the EIA tally, showing a jumbo 13.9 million barrel drop to 275.9 million barrels over the same period.
Crude oil prices actually fell Wednesday after the two reports as traders had expected stock draws, although not as deep as ultimately reported. New York Mercantile Exchange crude for November delivery was down 44 cents $30.39 a barrel.
LONG DECLINE
Crude stocks have dropped 50 million barrels since February, dragged down by the OPEC cartel`s supply curbs, lower production from Iraq, and deliveries into U.S. strategic reserves which are not included in the stock reports.
Only twice since 1963 when the EIA started keeping monthly figures have seven-month crude declines been sharper: in 1990-1991 after Iraq invaded Kuwait and in 1999 amid worries over the Y2K computer glitches that never occurred, said EIA analyst Doug MacIntyre.
In the Midwest (PADD 2), a big influence on U.S. oil prices as the home to the Cushing Oklahoma delivery point for New York crude futures, crude stocks fell by 1.1 million barrels and are at the lowest level for at least 12 years, the EIA said.
Supplies could fall further in coming weeks as crude imports dropped 450,000 barrels per day last week to 8.5 million -- less than expected given the extent of the disruption.
"If there is a surprise in the date it`s that crude oil imports didn`t fall by more. Given that, and with Lili heading towards land, one suspects that we may not yet have seen the worst in the data," said JP Morgan`s Horsnell.
WAR PREMIUM GONE
Tight U.S. crude supply is now as big a factor in oil`s strength above $30 as concern that conflict in Iraq could disrupt Middle East oil supply, analysts said.
"The bigger issue is that the inventories have been trending into a deficit," Mike Rothman of Merrill Lynch said. "Many are saying there is a war premium and are ignoring the basic fundamentals of an inventory imbalance."
While crude stocks are way down, products, including gasoline and distillate fuels, gained in the weekly EIA report. U.S. gasoline stocks rose 1.2 million barrels and distillate fuel stocks rose by 300,000 barrels.
But heating oil, key to the U.S. Northeast, was at 60 million barrels, the same level as in the first weekly report of September, the EIA said.
The rise in crude prices has kept refiners` profit margins under pressure and forced some to scale back production. "Heating oil inventories are still not building fast enough and are below normal," said Horsnell.
U.S. refinery inputs fell 300,000 bpd last week, partly pulled down by disruptions from Isidore, the EIA said. Refinery utilization last week fell 1.6 percentage points to 91.9 percent of operable capacity.
1+1 = IRAK KRIEG ums OEL !
U.S. crude stocks fell 10 million barrels to 275.2 million barrels after Tropical Storm Isidore shut in as much as 1.4 million barrels per day of offshore oil production for several days last week in the Gulf of Mexico.
Another storm, the stronger Hurricane Lili, is now plowing the same course as Isidore and could create even more disruption to U.S. oil production this week, forecasters said Wednesday.
Companies have already shut in supply and the nation`s main oil import terminal off Louisiana has halted operations.
"This will put bullish pressure on crude inventories next week, compounding Isidore`s effect. Another disruption this week will make it difficult for crude imports to catch up," said Washington`s Petroleum Finance Co. in a report.
BASEMENT LEVELS
Stocks are now approaching the 270 million barrels level which the National Petroleum Council says could result in supply problems if inventories stay that scarce during a period of strong demand such as a cold winter.
"Should the winter be as mild as last year, all should be fine, but if the winter is even just normal then we currently are heading for a problem," said Paul Horsnell of JP Morgan in a report.
On Tuesday, the American Petroleum Institute`s (API) report indicated an even bigger drawdown in crude supplies than the EIA tally, showing a jumbo 13.9 million barrel drop to 275.9 million barrels over the same period.
Crude oil prices actually fell Wednesday after the two reports as traders had expected stock draws, although not as deep as ultimately reported. New York Mercantile Exchange crude for November delivery was down 44 cents $30.39 a barrel.
LONG DECLINE
Crude stocks have dropped 50 million barrels since February, dragged down by the OPEC cartel`s supply curbs, lower production from Iraq, and deliveries into U.S. strategic reserves which are not included in the stock reports.
Only twice since 1963 when the EIA started keeping monthly figures have seven-month crude declines been sharper: in 1990-1991 after Iraq invaded Kuwait and in 1999 amid worries over the Y2K computer glitches that never occurred, said EIA analyst Doug MacIntyre.
In the Midwest (PADD 2), a big influence on U.S. oil prices as the home to the Cushing Oklahoma delivery point for New York crude futures, crude stocks fell by 1.1 million barrels and are at the lowest level for at least 12 years, the EIA said.
Supplies could fall further in coming weeks as crude imports dropped 450,000 barrels per day last week to 8.5 million -- less than expected given the extent of the disruption.
"If there is a surprise in the date it`s that crude oil imports didn`t fall by more. Given that, and with Lili heading towards land, one suspects that we may not yet have seen the worst in the data," said JP Morgan`s Horsnell.
WAR PREMIUM GONE
Tight U.S. crude supply is now as big a factor in oil`s strength above $30 as concern that conflict in Iraq could disrupt Middle East oil supply, analysts said.
"The bigger issue is that the inventories have been trending into a deficit," Mike Rothman of Merrill Lynch said. "Many are saying there is a war premium and are ignoring the basic fundamentals of an inventory imbalance."
While crude stocks are way down, products, including gasoline and distillate fuels, gained in the weekly EIA report. U.S. gasoline stocks rose 1.2 million barrels and distillate fuel stocks rose by 300,000 barrels.
But heating oil, key to the U.S. Northeast, was at 60 million barrels, the same level as in the first weekly report of September, the EIA said.
The rise in crude prices has kept refiners` profit margins under pressure and forced some to scale back production. "Heating oil inventories are still not building fast enough and are below normal," said Horsnell.
U.S. refinery inputs fell 300,000 bpd last week, partly pulled down by disruptions from Isidore, the EIA said. Refinery utilization last week fell 1.6 percentage points to 91.9 percent of operable capacity.
1+1 = IRAK KRIEG ums OEL !
The Coming Energy Crisis?
All warning signs that existed prior to the energy crises of 1973 and 1979 exist today.
Various energy security measures indicate that the potential for an energy shortage is high.
As submitted to Oil & Gas Journal for publication February 3, 2003
James L. Williams
President, WTRG Economics
E-mail: wtrg@wtrg.com
Phone: (479) 293-4081 A. F. Alhajji, PhD.
Ohio Northern University
E-mail: a-alhajji@onu.edu
Phone: (419) 772-2080
Download PDF version of The Coming Energy Crisis?
I. Introduction
Various measures of US energy security indicate that the US might be heading for an energy crisis. Many of the warning signs that existed before the energy crises of 1973 and 1979 exist today and they indicate that the current situation could be even worse. US dependence on petroleum imports has grown steadily for over a decade and has been at record levels for several years. Petroleum inventories are low and the ability of Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) and commercial petroleum stocks to cope with an interruption in imports matches the historic lows preceding the 1973 and 1979 energy crises.
The potential for an energy crisis has never been higher. Oil prices have recently exceeded $30 per barrel and they may continue to increase. The disruption of Venezuelan oil supplies has increased the US dependence on Middle Eastern oil and made the US more susceptible to supply interruption. With the crisis in Venezuela, the capacity of OPEC to meet any additional supply interruption is limited and a war with Iraq would put OPEC at its limit. Any energy crisis in the near future will hinder President Bush’s efforts to stimulate the economy through tax cuts and other fiscal measures. An energy crisis could cause a recession, inflation, and higher unemployment.
In this article we will discuss various measures of energy security, import dependency and vulnerability to assess the current US energy situation.
II. What Constitutes an Energy Crisis?
Energy crisis is a situation in which the nation suffers from a disruption of energy supplies (in our case, oil) accompanied by rapidly increasing energy prices that threaten economic and national security. The threat to economic security is represented by the possibility of declining economic growth, increasing inflation, rising unemployment, and losing billions of dollars in investment. The threat to national security is represented by the inability of the US government to exercise various foreign policy options, especially in regard to countries with substantial oil reserves. For example, the recent disruption of Venezuelan oil supplies may limit the US policy options toward Iraq.
Looking at the two energy crises of 1973 and 1979, we find some common elements between the two. Both events:
1. started with political turmoil in some of the oil producing countries.
2. were associated with low oil stocks.
3. were associated with high import concentration from a small number of suppliers.
4. were associated with declining US petroleum production.
5. were associated with high dependency on oil imports.
6. were associated with low level of oil industry spending
7. led to speculation
8. caused an economic downturn
9. limited US policy options in the Middle East The same indicators and warning signs that existed prior to the energy crises of 1973 and 1979 exist today: a political crisis in Venezuela that halted most of the Venezuelan oil exports, the threat of war with Iraq, stocks at their lowest level in twenty six years, imports nearly record high, more concentrated imports than ever, and low upstream expenditures. However, the current problem is even worse than the previous two energy crises because, unlike the 1970s, we are starting from a case of low economic growth. The massive stimulus package that is planned by the Bush administration could exacerbate the situation by increasing the demand for oil.
Some experts argued in 2000 that the US was heading for an energy crisis at that time. Although the crisis did not happen because not all the warning signs existed at that time, the current situation is much worse because US production is lower, import dependency and import concentration are higher, and world excess capacity is lower and matches that of the 1973 crisis.
III. Measures of Energy Security
There are five principal measures in evaluating petroleum security from a national perspective: domestic production capacity, dependence on imports, the degree of import concentration, petroleum inventory relative to imports, and the ability to second source petroleum imports in the event of an interruption from one or more suppliers.
1. Domestic Production Capacity
US oil production is currently at a record low and has been steadily declining since 1986 as shown in Figure (1). Although the US oil production reached its peak in the 1970s, the increased production in the second half of the 1970s came in large part from Alaska. Production from Prudhoe Bay came on line in significant volumes causing Alaskan production to increase from 464,000 barrels per day (b/d) in 1978 to 1.6 million in 1980 and peaked at 2 million b/d in 1988.
Petroleum production in the lower 48 states dropped from 9.0 million b/d in 1973 to 7.5 million b/d in 1978. Only the development of oil in Alaska prevented an even higher dependency. By 1980 the production decline halted and there were very modest gains that extended through 1985. The US domestic oil industry experienced a greater rate of price increase than the rest of the world as domestic prices were deregulated.
The collapse of oil prices in 1986 wiped out many of the stripper wells, especially in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Colorado. The US lost 1 million b/d in production between 1986 and 1989. The aftermath of the Kuwait invasion raised oil prices and halted the declining trend temporarily until 1992. The US oil production suffered another major setback in 1998 and early 1999 when world oil prices approached $10 b/d. However, higher oil prices since 1999 led to relatively stable US petroleum production of approximately 5.7 million b/d, about 60% of the US production in 1973.
Figure (1)
US Oil Production (Thousands b/d) Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
US oil production has been steadily declining since 1986
Source: Energy Information Administration
2. Dependence on Imports
The US dependence on foreign oil reached a record high in the last two years and declined slightly after September 11. The US dependency on foreign oil has increased steadily since 1986 as shown in Figure (2). Figure (2) measures the percentage of petroleum imports relative to total petroleum supply, which is probably the best overall measure of dependence. Major changes in imports are usually related to changes in the US economy and the US oil production.
At the time of the October 1973 Oil Embargo, the US received a little less than 35% of its petroleum supply from imports. In response to higher prices, total petroleum demand dropped from 15.8 million b/d in 1973 to 14.9 million b/d in 1975. The US oil consumption resumed and by 1978 the total petroleum consumption averaged 17.1 million b/d, 8 % higher than in 1973. Imports as a percentage of petroleum supply increased at a more or less steady rate from 35 % in 1973 to approximately 42 % in 1978 and exceeded 50 % in a few months. Dependence on imports grew faster than consumption.
The rapid increase in international oil prices starting in late 1978, led to the only sustained period of declining US dependence on imports in the post 1973 Embargo period. Two factors led to the decline: higher US oil production and lower consumption caused by substitution, conservation, increased efficiency and fuel switching.
Dependence on imports grew from 35 % in 1973 to 42 % in 1978 and as a result of the factors just outlined, fell to 27 % in 1985. With the oil price collapse in 1986, dependence once again resumed its upward path to 55 % in 2001. The impact of higher prices and the lingering events of September 11 led to a modest reduction to 53 % in 2002. The causes for the increase in dependence on imports in the last 15 years are almost the mirror image of the previous decline and are characterized by falling production and ever-increasing demand for transportation fuels. Gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel account for most of the increase in petroleum consumption. The only respites from the escalation in dependence were during the periods of the Gulf War with Iraq and post-September 11 attacks.
Figure (2)
US Petroleum Import Dependency
Net Imports/Petroleum Supply (%) Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
3. Degree of Import Concentration
Many experts argue that the degree of dependence has no impact on energy security as long as foreign oil is imported form secure sources. However, if the degree of dependence on non-secure sources increases, the energy security would be in jeopardy. In this case, the US vulnerability will increase and economic and national security will be compromised. Data indicates that US vulnerability is at a historic high, higher than any of the preceding energy crises.
We look at the percentage of imports from the top five suppliers as a measure of the supply vulnerability to an interruption by one or more key suppliers. This is an important measure of US vulnerability to supply disruption because it shows the high level of US import concentration by importing from few suppliers. Figure (3) indicates that the US vulnerability to supply disruption has increased to historic levels recently as the percentage of its petroleum imports from its top five suppliers increased from 62% in
2001 to 76% in the first ten months of 2002. Comparing this number to that of previous energy crises, we find that it is higher than the 63.8% and 53.4% concentration ratios in the first and second energy shocks respectively. It is also much higher than the concentration ratio during the Gulf War in 1991 when the US was forced to buy oil from areas outside the Gulf as a result of the loss of the Iraqi and Kuwaiti crude oil.
The recent Venezuelan experience teaches us an important lesson about “secure sources”. It teaches us that “secure sources” are temporary and that they change as politics change. Change in politics is faster than the change in the life of an oil field from exploration to depletion. The problem is that oil supplies take a long time to develop and consumers and producers look for long-term commitments. Therefore, the best policy for security is to take diversification to extremes rather than classifying oil sources as “secure” and “non-secure”. The Iraqi oil is classified as a “non-secure” source, yet the US is the largest consumer of Iraqi oil.
Figure (3)
US vulnerability to petroleum disruption has increased recently
The Percentage of Petroleum Imports from the Top 5 Suppliers to the US
Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
4. Stocks and the SPR
Commercial oil stocks in the US are at their lowest level in twenty six years. A common measure of energy security is the number of days in which oil in the SPR can replace imports of either crude oil or crude oil and petroleum products. We take a broader view and look at petroleum stocks as a whole, including crude oil in the SPR and in commercial inventories and use the number of days in which those stocks can replace imports. Today, US total petroleum inventories (in terms of days of coverage) are as low as they were during the first and the second energy crisis, as shown in Figure (4). Our measure suffers from the weakness that it does not adjust stocks downward by minimum operating inventories but it is a consistent relative measure of short-term security. Current commercial inventories are near the level at which spot shortages can occur.
It is obvious, judging from the ability to replace imports with current stocks, that the US is in no better shape to handle a supply interruption than it was at the time of the 1973 Oil Embargo, the Iranian revolution (which began in 1978) or the Iraq-Iran War (which started in 1980). In 1985, our measure was essentially twice the current level. The causes are relatively simple to identify: lower US production, higher consumption, lower commercial inventories and the failure to increase the SPR at a rate commensurate with our increased demand.
Although the SPR level has been increasing since President Bush ordered its refilling after September 11, the ability of the SPR to eliminate the crisis is limited. It may provide a cushion for a number of days, but it will not solve the problem in the products’ market if refiners are running at full capacity. However, an SPR release may have an impact on world oil markets and achieve its goal in avoiding energy crisis if President George Bush announces the release of more than 1 million b/d until the end of the crisis or during a period of time rather than specifying the total amount to be released. In addition, it may have an important psychological impact and reduce oil prices if the president announces that some of the oil released from the SPR will be exported to other countries. The impact of the release could be larger if it is coordinated with the SPR release in the countries that are members of the International Energy Agency. While such release may help avoid an energy crisis, it could be a temporary measure if the release is ill timed.
The premature release of SPR can jeopardize US national security in case of continued political problems in the oil producing countries and weakens US ability to respond to additional shortages. Premature release of SPR stocks can reduce incentives for private companies to maintain a stock cushion thereby further increasing US vulnerability to supply interruptions.
Figure (4)
US Oil Security
Total Stocks/Net Petroleum Imports Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
5 - World Excess Capacity
The world excess capacity today is similar to that of the first energy crisis in 1973, substantially lower than the capacity during the second energy crisis in 1979-1980, and slightly lower than excess capacity in 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait. As shown in Figure (5), the current world excess petroleum capacity is the lowest in thirty years if we exclude 1991 when Iraqi and Kuwaiti capacity were taken off the market as a result of the Gulf War.
Similar to the energy crises in 1973 and 1979, current excess capacity exists only in very few OPEC countries, primarily in Saudi Arabia. OPEC data indicates that the current level of excess capacity is similar to that of the previous energy crises.
The Saudi ability to expand capacity by another 500,000 barrels will not help the US in case of immediate oil shortages because it takes a long time to get that oil to the US for two reasons. First, it requires sixty to ninety days to bring that capacity on line. Second, it takes 4-6 weeks to get that oil to the US. In addition, some experts believe that OPEC capacity statistics as reported by the US Department of Energy (DOE) are overestimated. In fact, the DOE in its most recent reports revised downward some of its estimates of excess capacity in Kuwait and Indonesia.
In conclusion, world excess capacity is at a record low, the capacity is concentrated in a few OPEC member countries, and it takes time to get the oil to the US. These three reasons can exacerbate the shortages in the US and create a potential crisis.
FigureFigure (5)
World Excess Capacity (Millions b/d) Vs. Nominal Oil Price ($)
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
V. Conclusion
By every measure of petroleum security or vulnerability that we have examined, the United States is as vulnerable, and in most cases more so, than at the time of the 1973 Embargo. Domestic production is about half, dependence on imports is 50 % higher, the number of days that stocks can replace imports is 5 % lower, and a larger percentage of imports is concentrated in a few suppliers. In addition, an action in Iraq would result in the elimination of most of the world’s excess capacity for an indeterminate period of time.
An energy crisis is a situation in which we have disruption in oil supplies that increases energy prices rapidly and threatens our economic and national security. The experience of the Gulf War shows us that indicators showing vulnerability in many areas in and of themselves
do not mean that there will be an oil crisis, but the current measures do indicate that the potential is historically high.
The lack of public information regarding the amount of storage by Saudis and others in the Caribbean makes it difficult to make predictions regarding the amount of stocks available to US markets. In fact, if rumors about large storage build up in the Caribbean are correct, the US may suffer from a period of high oil prices but supplies may be sufficient. The return of Lake Maracaibo pilots to work in Venezuelan will also lead to some additional supply. In addition, the normal seasonal decline in the spring of 2-2.5 b/d will soften the impact of any supply interruption from Venezuela, Iraq, or any other country. If there are shortages, the lessons that we will learn in the coming months have the potential for shaping energy policy in the US for years to come.
Copyright ©2003 James L. Williams and A.F. Alhajji
http://www.wtrg.com/EnergyCrisis/index.html
Tja, W
weiss es seit Jahren !
Und keiner hört zu
http://www.energiekrise.de
All warning signs that existed prior to the energy crises of 1973 and 1979 exist today.
Various energy security measures indicate that the potential for an energy shortage is high.
As submitted to Oil & Gas Journal for publication February 3, 2003
James L. Williams
President, WTRG Economics
E-mail: wtrg@wtrg.com
Phone: (479) 293-4081 A. F. Alhajji, PhD.
Ohio Northern University
E-mail: a-alhajji@onu.edu
Phone: (419) 772-2080
Download PDF version of The Coming Energy Crisis?
I. Introduction
Various measures of US energy security indicate that the US might be heading for an energy crisis. Many of the warning signs that existed before the energy crises of 1973 and 1979 exist today and they indicate that the current situation could be even worse. US dependence on petroleum imports has grown steadily for over a decade and has been at record levels for several years. Petroleum inventories are low and the ability of Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) and commercial petroleum stocks to cope with an interruption in imports matches the historic lows preceding the 1973 and 1979 energy crises.
The potential for an energy crisis has never been higher. Oil prices have recently exceeded $30 per barrel and they may continue to increase. The disruption of Venezuelan oil supplies has increased the US dependence on Middle Eastern oil and made the US more susceptible to supply interruption. With the crisis in Venezuela, the capacity of OPEC to meet any additional supply interruption is limited and a war with Iraq would put OPEC at its limit. Any energy crisis in the near future will hinder President Bush’s efforts to stimulate the economy through tax cuts and other fiscal measures. An energy crisis could cause a recession, inflation, and higher unemployment.
In this article we will discuss various measures of energy security, import dependency and vulnerability to assess the current US energy situation.
II. What Constitutes an Energy Crisis?
Energy crisis is a situation in which the nation suffers from a disruption of energy supplies (in our case, oil) accompanied by rapidly increasing energy prices that threaten economic and national security. The threat to economic security is represented by the possibility of declining economic growth, increasing inflation, rising unemployment, and losing billions of dollars in investment. The threat to national security is represented by the inability of the US government to exercise various foreign policy options, especially in regard to countries with substantial oil reserves. For example, the recent disruption of Venezuelan oil supplies may limit the US policy options toward Iraq.
Looking at the two energy crises of 1973 and 1979, we find some common elements between the two. Both events:
1. started with political turmoil in some of the oil producing countries.
2. were associated with low oil stocks.
3. were associated with high import concentration from a small number of suppliers.
4. were associated with declining US petroleum production.
5. were associated with high dependency on oil imports.
6. were associated with low level of oil industry spending
7. led to speculation
8. caused an economic downturn
9. limited US policy options in the Middle East The same indicators and warning signs that existed prior to the energy crises of 1973 and 1979 exist today: a political crisis in Venezuela that halted most of the Venezuelan oil exports, the threat of war with Iraq, stocks at their lowest level in twenty six years, imports nearly record high, more concentrated imports than ever, and low upstream expenditures. However, the current problem is even worse than the previous two energy crises because, unlike the 1970s, we are starting from a case of low economic growth. The massive stimulus package that is planned by the Bush administration could exacerbate the situation by increasing the demand for oil.
Some experts argued in 2000 that the US was heading for an energy crisis at that time. Although the crisis did not happen because not all the warning signs existed at that time, the current situation is much worse because US production is lower, import dependency and import concentration are higher, and world excess capacity is lower and matches that of the 1973 crisis.
III. Measures of Energy Security
There are five principal measures in evaluating petroleum security from a national perspective: domestic production capacity, dependence on imports, the degree of import concentration, petroleum inventory relative to imports, and the ability to second source petroleum imports in the event of an interruption from one or more suppliers.
1. Domestic Production Capacity
US oil production is currently at a record low and has been steadily declining since 1986 as shown in Figure (1). Although the US oil production reached its peak in the 1970s, the increased production in the second half of the 1970s came in large part from Alaska. Production from Prudhoe Bay came on line in significant volumes causing Alaskan production to increase from 464,000 barrels per day (b/d) in 1978 to 1.6 million in 1980 and peaked at 2 million b/d in 1988.
Petroleum production in the lower 48 states dropped from 9.0 million b/d in 1973 to 7.5 million b/d in 1978. Only the development of oil in Alaska prevented an even higher dependency. By 1980 the production decline halted and there were very modest gains that extended through 1985. The US domestic oil industry experienced a greater rate of price increase than the rest of the world as domestic prices were deregulated.
The collapse of oil prices in 1986 wiped out many of the stripper wells, especially in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Colorado. The US lost 1 million b/d in production between 1986 and 1989. The aftermath of the Kuwait invasion raised oil prices and halted the declining trend temporarily until 1992. The US oil production suffered another major setback in 1998 and early 1999 when world oil prices approached $10 b/d. However, higher oil prices since 1999 led to relatively stable US petroleum production of approximately 5.7 million b/d, about 60% of the US production in 1973.
Figure (1)
US Oil Production (Thousands b/d) Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
US oil production has been steadily declining since 1986
Source: Energy Information Administration
2. Dependence on Imports
The US dependence on foreign oil reached a record high in the last two years and declined slightly after September 11. The US dependency on foreign oil has increased steadily since 1986 as shown in Figure (2). Figure (2) measures the percentage of petroleum imports relative to total petroleum supply, which is probably the best overall measure of dependence. Major changes in imports are usually related to changes in the US economy and the US oil production.
At the time of the October 1973 Oil Embargo, the US received a little less than 35% of its petroleum supply from imports. In response to higher prices, total petroleum demand dropped from 15.8 million b/d in 1973 to 14.9 million b/d in 1975. The US oil consumption resumed and by 1978 the total petroleum consumption averaged 17.1 million b/d, 8 % higher than in 1973. Imports as a percentage of petroleum supply increased at a more or less steady rate from 35 % in 1973 to approximately 42 % in 1978 and exceeded 50 % in a few months. Dependence on imports grew faster than consumption.
The rapid increase in international oil prices starting in late 1978, led to the only sustained period of declining US dependence on imports in the post 1973 Embargo period. Two factors led to the decline: higher US oil production and lower consumption caused by substitution, conservation, increased efficiency and fuel switching.
Dependence on imports grew from 35 % in 1973 to 42 % in 1978 and as a result of the factors just outlined, fell to 27 % in 1985. With the oil price collapse in 1986, dependence once again resumed its upward path to 55 % in 2001. The impact of higher prices and the lingering events of September 11 led to a modest reduction to 53 % in 2002. The causes for the increase in dependence on imports in the last 15 years are almost the mirror image of the previous decline and are characterized by falling production and ever-increasing demand for transportation fuels. Gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel account for most of the increase in petroleum consumption. The only respites from the escalation in dependence were during the periods of the Gulf War with Iraq and post-September 11 attacks.
Figure (2)
US Petroleum Import Dependency
Net Imports/Petroleum Supply (%) Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
3. Degree of Import Concentration
Many experts argue that the degree of dependence has no impact on energy security as long as foreign oil is imported form secure sources. However, if the degree of dependence on non-secure sources increases, the energy security would be in jeopardy. In this case, the US vulnerability will increase and economic and national security will be compromised. Data indicates that US vulnerability is at a historic high, higher than any of the preceding energy crises.
We look at the percentage of imports from the top five suppliers as a measure of the supply vulnerability to an interruption by one or more key suppliers. This is an important measure of US vulnerability to supply disruption because it shows the high level of US import concentration by importing from few suppliers. Figure (3) indicates that the US vulnerability to supply disruption has increased to historic levels recently as the percentage of its petroleum imports from its top five suppliers increased from 62% in
2001 to 76% in the first ten months of 2002. Comparing this number to that of previous energy crises, we find that it is higher than the 63.8% and 53.4% concentration ratios in the first and second energy shocks respectively. It is also much higher than the concentration ratio during the Gulf War in 1991 when the US was forced to buy oil from areas outside the Gulf as a result of the loss of the Iraqi and Kuwaiti crude oil.
The recent Venezuelan experience teaches us an important lesson about “secure sources”. It teaches us that “secure sources” are temporary and that they change as politics change. Change in politics is faster than the change in the life of an oil field from exploration to depletion. The problem is that oil supplies take a long time to develop and consumers and producers look for long-term commitments. Therefore, the best policy for security is to take diversification to extremes rather than classifying oil sources as “secure” and “non-secure”. The Iraqi oil is classified as a “non-secure” source, yet the US is the largest consumer of Iraqi oil.
Figure (3)
US vulnerability to petroleum disruption has increased recently
The Percentage of Petroleum Imports from the Top 5 Suppliers to the US
Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
4. Stocks and the SPR
Commercial oil stocks in the US are at their lowest level in twenty six years. A common measure of energy security is the number of days in which oil in the SPR can replace imports of either crude oil or crude oil and petroleum products. We take a broader view and look at petroleum stocks as a whole, including crude oil in the SPR and in commercial inventories and use the number of days in which those stocks can replace imports. Today, US total petroleum inventories (in terms of days of coverage) are as low as they were during the first and the second energy crisis, as shown in Figure (4). Our measure suffers from the weakness that it does not adjust stocks downward by minimum operating inventories but it is a consistent relative measure of short-term security. Current commercial inventories are near the level at which spot shortages can occur.
It is obvious, judging from the ability to replace imports with current stocks, that the US is in no better shape to handle a supply interruption than it was at the time of the 1973 Oil Embargo, the Iranian revolution (which began in 1978) or the Iraq-Iran War (which started in 1980). In 1985, our measure was essentially twice the current level. The causes are relatively simple to identify: lower US production, higher consumption, lower commercial inventories and the failure to increase the SPR at a rate commensurate with our increased demand.
Although the SPR level has been increasing since President Bush ordered its refilling after September 11, the ability of the SPR to eliminate the crisis is limited. It may provide a cushion for a number of days, but it will not solve the problem in the products’ market if refiners are running at full capacity. However, an SPR release may have an impact on world oil markets and achieve its goal in avoiding energy crisis if President George Bush announces the release of more than 1 million b/d until the end of the crisis or during a period of time rather than specifying the total amount to be released. In addition, it may have an important psychological impact and reduce oil prices if the president announces that some of the oil released from the SPR will be exported to other countries. The impact of the release could be larger if it is coordinated with the SPR release in the countries that are members of the International Energy Agency. While such release may help avoid an energy crisis, it could be a temporary measure if the release is ill timed.
The premature release of SPR can jeopardize US national security in case of continued political problems in the oil producing countries and weakens US ability to respond to additional shortages. Premature release of SPR stocks can reduce incentives for private companies to maintain a stock cushion thereby further increasing US vulnerability to supply interruptions.
Figure (4)
US Oil Security
Total Stocks/Net Petroleum Imports Vs. Nominal Oil Prices
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
5 - World Excess Capacity
The world excess capacity today is similar to that of the first energy crisis in 1973, substantially lower than the capacity during the second energy crisis in 1979-1980, and slightly lower than excess capacity in 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait. As shown in Figure (5), the current world excess petroleum capacity is the lowest in thirty years if we exclude 1991 when Iraqi and Kuwaiti capacity were taken off the market as a result of the Gulf War.
Similar to the energy crises in 1973 and 1979, current excess capacity exists only in very few OPEC countries, primarily in Saudi Arabia. OPEC data indicates that the current level of excess capacity is similar to that of the previous energy crises.
The Saudi ability to expand capacity by another 500,000 barrels will not help the US in case of immediate oil shortages because it takes a long time to get that oil to the US for two reasons. First, it requires sixty to ninety days to bring that capacity on line. Second, it takes 4-6 weeks to get that oil to the US. In addition, some experts believe that OPEC capacity statistics as reported by the US Department of Energy (DOE) are overestimated. In fact, the DOE in its most recent reports revised downward some of its estimates of excess capacity in Kuwait and Indonesia.
In conclusion, world excess capacity is at a record low, the capacity is concentrated in a few OPEC member countries, and it takes time to get the oil to the US. These three reasons can exacerbate the shortages in the US and create a potential crisis.
FigureFigure (5)
World Excess Capacity (Millions b/d) Vs. Nominal Oil Price ($)
Source: WTRG Economics, Energy Information Administration
V. Conclusion
By every measure of petroleum security or vulnerability that we have examined, the United States is as vulnerable, and in most cases more so, than at the time of the 1973 Embargo. Domestic production is about half, dependence on imports is 50 % higher, the number of days that stocks can replace imports is 5 % lower, and a larger percentage of imports is concentrated in a few suppliers. In addition, an action in Iraq would result in the elimination of most of the world’s excess capacity for an indeterminate period of time.
An energy crisis is a situation in which we have disruption in oil supplies that increases energy prices rapidly and threatens our economic and national security. The experience of the Gulf War shows us that indicators showing vulnerability in many areas in and of themselves
do not mean that there will be an oil crisis, but the current measures do indicate that the potential is historically high.
The lack of public information regarding the amount of storage by Saudis and others in the Caribbean makes it difficult to make predictions regarding the amount of stocks available to US markets. In fact, if rumors about large storage build up in the Caribbean are correct, the US may suffer from a period of high oil prices but supplies may be sufficient. The return of Lake Maracaibo pilots to work in Venezuelan will also lead to some additional supply. In addition, the normal seasonal decline in the spring of 2-2.5 b/d will soften the impact of any supply interruption from Venezuela, Iraq, or any other country. If there are shortages, the lessons that we will learn in the coming months have the potential for shaping energy policy in the US for years to come.
Copyright ©2003 James L. Williams and A.F. Alhajji
http://www.wtrg.com/EnergyCrisis/index.html
Tja, W
weiss es seit Jahren ! Und keiner hört zu
http://www.energiekrise.de
USA der Weltgrösste Energiemarkt Kollabiert !
Gas 9,70 $
Oel 37 $
Heizoel : 1,17 $
Allzeithoch
Zeitenwende !
Gas 9,70 $
Oel 37 $
Heizoel : 1,17 $
Allzeithoch Zeitenwende !
DurchsuchenBeitrag zu dieser Diskussion schreiben
Zu dieser Diskussion können keine Beiträge mehr verfasst werden, da der letzte Beitrag vor mehr als zwei Jahren verfasst wurde und die Diskussion daraufhin archiviert wurde.
Bitte wenden Sie sich an feedback@wallstreet-online.de und erfragen Sie die Reaktivierung der Diskussion oder starten Sie eine neue Diskussion.
Meistdiskutiert
| Wertpapier | Beiträge | |
|---|---|---|
| 263 | ||
| 106 | ||
| 104 | ||
| 84 | ||
| 72 | ||
| 60 | ||
| 58 | ||
| 43 | ||
| 43 | ||
| 36 |
| Wertpapier | Beiträge | |
|---|---|---|
| 28 | ||
| 27 | ||
| 26 | ||
| 22 | ||
| 21 | ||
| 20 | ||
| 18 | ||
| 18 | ||
| 18 | ||
| 17 |
