Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Analyst calls oil at $100/barrel "pretty cheap"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-11-08 10:54 AM
Original message
Analyst calls oil at $100/barrel "pretty cheap"
How is it that I, basically a web-surfing dilettante, understand the concept of "inelastic demand" better than these people who supposedly make their living by selling their superior understanding of the oil industry?

Crude oil at $100 a barrel would still be "pretty cheap" because global oil demand shows no signs of abating and new energy sources are in short supply, a prominent U.S. oil analyst said on Thursday.

Matt Simmons, founder of Houston-based Simmons and Co International, dismissed the idea that a looming U.S. recession will tame crude oil prices, which have tumbled since they peaked above $100 a barrel on January 3.

"Demand is far more durable than anyone ever thought," Simmons told Reuters in an interview. "We're on an insatiable growth curve."


http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN1019749220080110
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-11-08 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. "Demand is far more durable than anyone ever thought"
In other words, kiss the idea of demand destruction goodbye. We'll enter a recession and still be paying $100/barrel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-11-08 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. well, what it means is that demand destruction follows the earthquake model.
instead of the pretty equilibrium-driven model favored by economists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-11-08 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Maybe. We could also enter an era of "catabolic collapse"
Edited on Fri Jan-11-08 01:45 PM by GliderGuider
http://www.xs4all.nl/~wtv/powerdown/greer.htm

However, a lot depends on how strongly coupled the network nodes of our civilization turn out to be. The stronger the coupling the greater the shock when the fault slips. Of course we'll probably get some of each, just to make sure we don't get bored on the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-11-08 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. That's how it looks.
We will start converting ever larger amounts of capital into income in order to pay for the oil, because we just can't afford to have the machine stop. Welcome to the cheese slicer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC