November 28th, 2008
THE RAPIDLY APPROACHING GLOBAL OIL SUPPLY CRUNCH
A snip at $48.50. Now that the price of a barrel of benchmark Brent crude continues to fall like a stone in the global recession, a drop of no less than two-thirds since the high point of £147.50 just four months ago, the relief is huge among motorists and hard-pressed consumers. Conversely, for the oil-producing countries (especially Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Venezuela) it is potentially cataclysmic, though some like the US may rejoice at that. But there is another dimension to this oil price slide which has been little noticed, but which long-term is extremely serious.
If oil prices remain well below a certain critical level for any significant period of time, large amounts of investment in expected oil production capacity will simply be written off, and the consequence could then be a recovery-stopping supply-side crunch within little more than 2 years. That critical level is widely reckoned within the oil industry to be $90 a barrel. A current price as low as half that critical level is already forcing many companies to drop oil projects, and the banking crisis is also squeezing project financing for foreign oil companies operating in OPEC and outside.
Russia’s Big Four energy companies – Gazprom, LUKoil, Rosneft, and TNK-BP – depend heavily on debt to finance operations and are scaling down their investments. They have already been forced to seek an allocation of more credit to refinance their external debts. But with Russia now facing a $150bn shortfall in its spending plans for 2009 and where Russian markets have lost a stunning 70% of their value in just 6 months since May, it is all too likely they will be forced to slash their investments further.
The consequences of this for the EU and the UK are very serious. Since the EU gets 40% of its gas from Russia where 70% of the gas fields are already in decline, any further major cutting back in future oil and gas investments could act as a pincer on EU and UK energy supply. Indeed the Russian Energy Industry has warned that if the decline continues, Russia may not be able to service even its own domestic gas needs by 2010 – this from a country where Gazprom if the largest extractor of gas in the world.
A prolonged slump in the oil price at below $50 a barrel will thus inevitably lead to another cycle of shortages and soaring prices. This intense price volatility is the first stage of the Devil’s See-saw that is likely to accompany the coming of Peak Oil which is widely expected within the next 5 years. These very sharp boom and bust capitalist cycles in oil may well turn out to be even more globally destabilising than the financial crunch. What is clearly needed, though sadly highly unlikely, is an international conference (perhaps as a serious offshoot from the lightweight G20 conference a week ago?) to reach a binding agreement on the oil price for a 5 year period rolled forward which might then avoid the massive overshoot in prices at both peak and nadir which we are seeing at the present time, with potentially calamitous consequences.











November 28th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Oil will run out gas will run out electricity will not because we can produce it. So it’s time to look at other methods of giving people power, nuclear power stations sadly is the answer, so lets build the dam things.
December 1st, 2008 at 1:31 am
I agree if there were a series of price controls the system may stabilize, so long as the price would increase over time to allow for the reduction in oil flow rates. However, i would like to see a larger shift to localization rather than seeking an international consensus. It is worrying that the government still believes centralization will create efficiency, and that we can somehow grow out of our predicament. Alternative energy sources wont be a serious solution, and reducing interest rates and massive bailouts compounds the issue with inflationary pressures. Promoting a negative growth/localization scenario in the long term, would be extremely difficult, but help more people adjust to the coming change. We would be at odds with the world, but a step back is better than off a cliff. The structure for this movement is already in place with climate change, and if people could walk to work, eat local food and buy local goods, the problem would be solved. That is, if our population isn’t too large to accommodate such a shift.
December 1st, 2008 at 8:08 am
Seems comments are getting stuck again, Is it not time for the UK and the world to look for other means of powering our world, be it electric cars to electric buses to electric cookers we can make electric, the fact is we are playing around either we produce new power through Nuclear fuel or we return to coal. But the one thing we cannot do is to expect the rest of the world to supply us with power when it;s short.