Verdere daling olieprijs in de pijplijn

Het geldverslindende klimaatbeleid gericht op decarbonisering van de economie (het terugdringen van het gebruik van koolstofhoudende fossiele brandstoffen) berust op twee onhoudbare pijlers: (1) de uitstoot van CO2 zou tot een catastrofale opwarming van de aarde leiden en (2) de prijs van fossiele brandstoffen zou blijven stijgen.

Over klimaatgevoeligheid (het effect van een verdubbeling van de CO2–concentratie in de atmosfeer op de temperatuur) heb ik al vaker geschreven. In een gezamenlijk rapport kwamen Nic Lewis en Marcel Crok op een lager getal dan het IPCC: tussen 1,5 en 2 graden Celsius (voor de fijnproevers: het gaat hier om de ECS: 'Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity'). Zij baseerden zich op metingen, ontleend aan de rapporten van het VN–klimaatpanel zélf! Zie ook hier De Groene Rekenkamer.

Daarna kwam Nic Lewis in een artikel met Judith Curry, in een peer–reviewed tijdschrift, met een nieuwe schatting die nóg lager was: 1,33 graden Celsius (voor de fijnproevers: de TCR: 'Transient Climate Response').

Andere wetenschappers kwamen op basis van andere methoden – theoretische berekeningen – op nóg lagere getallen uit. De toekomst zal moeten uitwijzen wie er het dichtste bij zit. Hoe het ook zij, de uitkomst van hun onderzoek geeft geenszins aanleiding tot zorg, en al helemaal niet tot paniek, zoals de klimaatalarmisten ons willen aanpraten.

Maar hoe zit het nu met de ontwikkeling van de prijs van fossiele brandstoffen, die volgens de alarmisten door het plafond zou gaan?

Onder de titel, 'Oil Price Drops on Oversupply' schreef Steve Austin voor 'Oil Price.Net' onderstaand artikel. Hij laat m.i. wat steekjes vallen. Maar grosso modo lijkt mij zijn betoog wel plausibel.

In June of 2014 the Brent Crude Oil Price hit $115 per barrel and many oil market insiders were predicting higher prices. Other analyst however, called a peak, and their predictions proved to be correct. By the beginning of October 2014, the Index dropped to $95 and predictions of further falls down to $90 or even $80 hold sway. What changed?

Back in June, the world suddenly became aware of the Muslim fundamentalist group called IS. This band of revolutionaries threatened to disrupt Iraq’s oil output, just as that country was beginning to open the taps and sell to the world. OPEC‘s estimates of world demand for oil showed that the loss of Iraq’s output would produce a large shortfall in supply. When supply cannot meet demand, prices rise. However, that simplistic view ignored many other factors that were coming into play in the oil market. Speculators talked the market up and encouraged panic buying. That panic pricing lasted long enough for those insiders heavily stocked with oil futures to offload them on the general public.

Hydraulic fracturing in the United States has redrawn the geo-political map and fundamentally altered the oil market. The United States was and still is the world’s largest consumer of oil. Back in 2005, the US had to import 60 per cent of its supplies from abroad. That demand boosted the coffers of oil suppliers and made the control of major oil producing regions vital to US economic stability and so central to American foreign policy. By 2014, however, the USA only needs to import 3 per cent of its oil consumption. As fracking increases domestic production, the USA will switch from being a net importer to a net exporter of oil and that will change the world’s political alliances forever.

Verder behandelt de auteur de politieke en militaire onrust in het Midden Oosten, zoals de opkomst van IS. Maar in het gebied waarin IS actief is, is weinig olie. Voor zover er olie is, is IS maar al te graag bereid deze te verkopen. Immers ook IS heeft geld nodig.

Maar hoe zit het met het aanbod van olie uit andere gebieden?

The fall in oil prices have been predicted since the middle of 2013. Three significant factors were clearly visible a year ago and these movements were bound to lower prices because of greater supply of oil. The end of the US-led embargo on Iran automatically presaged a glut in oil supply. Iran took America’s blows on the chin as it attempted to develop a nuclear deterrent. However, the financial embargo on that country left its economy in tatters. Iranian blustering folded and they shelved their nuclear program. Iran’s extreme need for cash meant that it would inevitably pump out as much oil as physically possible no matter how low their actions sent the oil price. Libya suffered a lot of damage to its oil infrastructure during the overthrow of Gadaffi three years ago. However, all that damage has been repaired and now Libya is back in business. Like Iran, Libya is desperate for cash and will sell as much oil as it can no matter how low the oil price goes. Fracking in the US is the third element that has increased oil supply. Although increases in US oil production were predicted, no one foresaw the great leap in production seen this year.

Recessions reduce the demand for fuel and raw materials for industrial production; booms, increase demand. Since 2008, when the Western world collapsed into recession, growth in China has kept demand for oil at steady levels. As the developed world recovered around 2011, the extra demand placed upward pressure on the price of oil and gas. In 2011, a tsunami caused the Japanese nuclear power plant at Fukushima to go into meltdown. Japan closed down all its nuclear power plants and reopened its mothballed oil-, gas- and coal-fired power stations. This factor placed enormous pressure on the world’s fuel supplies keeping prices for all three power sources buoyant. However, this demand suddenly evaporated in July 2014 when Japan reopened all its nuclear power plants. [Noot HL: Dat is niet geheel juist.]

Prices of coal and gas were the first to plummet and only the panic over IS managed to stave off the fall in oil prices for a short period. By the beginning of September 2014, it became clear that industrial production in Japan, Germany, France and China had started to fall. The expansionary phase of the world’s economic cycle is coming to an end and recession is on the horizon again. Demand for oil had a sudden fall with the reopening of Japan’s nuclear program and there is no growth in the world to take up the slack. Demand for oil will not rise again until the economic cycle returns to growth – an event that is unlikely within the next four years.

Increased production from Libya, the USA, Iran, and even Iraq means that oil supplies greatly increased through 2014. The Japanese nuclear program and the onset of worldwide recession mean that demand has plummeted. Thus, a fall in the oil price in unavoidable. The only event that will avert a fall in the oil price is a cut in production. .

Conclusie:

The current oil price falls have been in the pipeline for a long time and they are set to continue. OPEC does not seem to be prepared to do anything and intends to debate whether to support a Brent Crude price of $90 at its next meeting in November 2014. The fact that this price level is not an urgent certainty for the club shows that it is unlikely to be defended. A fall to $80 seems likely over the next year. A rush to develop oil production in Europe could even see the oil price fall to $60 a barrel if Denmark is going to find a market for all its Arctic oil. [Noot HL: Het is mij onbekend waar de auteur deze informatie vandaan heeft.] If there is anyone in the world that would find such a price difficult to contemplate, it must be Russia. However, at the beginning of October 2014, Russia’s central bank announced a $60 price would be its trigger to intervene in the economy. That shows that even the Russian’s can see further price falls ahead and are planning for them.

Lees verder hier.

Als deze prognose werkelijkheid wordt, wat zal er dan met het decarboniseringsbeleid gebeuren? Drie maal raden. Eerste keer goed!

Voor mijn eerdere DDS–bijdragen zie hier.