OPEC Cracks?
'Oil prices could head for another substantial fall,' says Harvard analyst.

One of my go-to analysts on oil production is former Italian oilman Leonardo Maugeri, who now works at the Belfer Center at Harvard University. In my book, The End of Doom, I cited his 2012 analysis Oil: The Next Revolution published when oil prices hovered around $100 per barrel in which he correctly predicted that they would drop steeply in the middle of current decade. Why? "Oil is not in short supply. From a purely physical point of view, there are huge volumes of conventional and unconventional oils still to be developed, with no 'peak-oil' in sight," he argued. Maugeri was right: WTI oil fell below $30 per barrel in early 2016.
Last fall, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and Russia agreed to restrain their production (create a shortage) in order to boost prices. The Saudi Arabians had let their own production rip for the last couple of years in the hope of pushing down oil prices so low that they would bankrupt U.S. shale oil producers. Many rigs did stop drilling, but U.S. producers became much more efficient and many successfully competed with OPEC oil even at the lower prices. The recently higher prices over $50 per barrel spurred by OPEC's supposed production restraint has been a gift to U.S. oil producers who have ramped production back up to over 9 million barrels per day.
In his latest analysis, Maugeri suggests that OPEC's production numbers are fishy and notes that global oil demand is less than anticipated. As if right on cue, the price of WTI crude fell $50 per barrel on the day Maugeri released his new report. From Maugeri:
[W]e still need more data and elements in order to make a sound assessment of what will actually happen on global oil markets in 2017. But it's not too early to raise a red flag: there is something wrong in the numbers that circulate globally about oil supplies. And one thing is for sure: OPEC and non-OPEC cuts are not enough to re-absorb the world's excess supply. So, unless oil demand growth rebounds to record levels in 2017, oil prices could head for another substantial fall.
Peak oil indeed.
In any case, Maugeri does believe that era of cheap oil—sustained prices below $30 per barrel—is over, but thinks that prices will bounce between $50 and $70 until the end of this decade at least.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
More like 35-60.
"Peak oil indeed"
As legitimate as 'peak population'.
W: Not really. See also, Is Economic Growth Environmentally Sustainable?
Dennis and Donella Meadows had this covered in The Limits to Growth back in the 70s. It was based on computer models by experts and even included lots of images of line printer generated graphs to show how computery it was.
That said, concern about water/population makes some sense.
Is your natural disposition to be a contrarian, Bailey? Your own article refutes the notions of 'peak population'
W: Perhaps I misunderstood your comment - Lutz et alia suggest that peak population will occur later in this century due to the voluntary choices of people to have fewer children.
If by "peak population" you meant to reference the Malthusian/Ehrlichian predictions of collapse due to famine or resource depletion, then you are right that those are wrong.
Even at $70 a barrel, gas is cheap in terms of hours of work required to buy a gallon of it, and that's the best measure.
Petrol Sweat Index: How Many Hours Do People Have to Work to Buy a Gallon of Petrol?
http://tinyurl.com/j5jn3r7
n: Very nice. Thanks for the link.
Petrol Sweat Index: How Many Hours Do People Have to Work to Buy a Gallon of Petrol?
Wow, look at Venezuela! Using math the way Bernie Sanders does it is my estimation they are twice as well off as the United States. As an added bonus they do not have to agonize over 23 choices for deodorant. Or even one choice for bread.
The Saudi Arabians had let their own production rip for the last couple of years in the hope of pushing down oil prices so low that they would bankrupt U.S. shale oil producers.
This was such a stupid strategy unless they planned to keep the oil flowing at those rates. There was no reason to believe shale oil production would not pick right the hell back up as soon as oil prices rose again. Hell, they've been drilling Marcellus shale wells and capping them for just this eventuality.
From my understanding they were also trying to cripple the Iranian economy, at a time when they were under UN sanctions
Russia hardest hit.
S: Let's not forget Venezuela. 😉
Oil prices drop. Que headless chicken panic at Sierra Club headquarters.
IoT Companies
Mobile App Development Companies
Digital Marketing Agencies
SharePoint Consulting Companies
Cloud Consulting Companies
iPhone App Development Companies
Business Intelligence Tools
WordPress Development Companies
eCommerce Development Companies
Social Media Analytics Tools
DevOps Consulting Companies
Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning Companies
SEO Consultants