Hands up any one out there who understands just what the Saudis are up to with their oil price moves? Or do we simply need to wait and see what rewards Obama will dish out to them in his final two years for putting financial pressure on Russia? Or is it simply econ 101 and little to do with Saudi? Increased supply at high prices, resulting in more volume, minor weakening in total world demand and the inevitable price fall? Clearly the House of Saud did not want to cut their production which has led to this 40% or more drop in price and a great pain to a number of high cost oil producers, especially those with declining crude oil supplies. Between 2008 and 2013 Mexico, Venezuela, Iran, Norway, EU, UK, Libya all lost production.
What ever the cause, the resulting low prices will also cause pain to Alberta, and to the federal government. Despite the low royalties and accelerated depreciation rates enjoyed by the industry, the present contribution to the coffers of these govts from the tar sands, mostly in the form of employee taxes, is considerable. One est suggested that by about 2020 the feds would be receiving 20% of their revenue from oil derived sources.
With regard to Russia, one strategic think tank I have some respect for, Stratfor, has this to say, written by at staff member visiting, presumably before their bank rate increased to 17%. “The Russians pointed out that economic shambles was the norm for Russia, and prosperity the exception. There is always the expectation that prosperity will end and the normal constrictions of Russian poverty return.
The Russians suffered terribly during the 1990s under Boris Yeltsin but also under previous governments stretching back to the czars. In spite of this, several pointed out, they had won the wars they needed to win and had managed to live lives worth living. The golden age of the previous 10 years was coming to an end. That was to be expected, and it would be endured. The government officials meant this as a warning, and I do not think it was a bluff. The pivot of the conversation was about sanctions, and the intent was to show that they would not cause Russia to change its policy toward Ukraine.
Russians' strength is that they can endure things that would break other nations. It was also pointed out that they tend to support the government regardless of competence when Russia feels threatened. Therefore, the Russians argued, no one should expect that sanctions, no matter how harsh, would cause Moscow to capitulate. Instead the Russians would respond with their own sanctions, which were not specified but which I assume would mean seizing the assets of Western companies in Russia and curtailing agricultural imports from Europe. There was no talk of cutting off natural gas supplies to Europe.” See http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/viewing-russia-inside#axzz3M4VMCLhY
Meanwhile, no where have I seen any commentary on these price changes and there impact on the theory of peak oil, which basically suggests that we are roughly half way through what oil was originally laid down; and just what these short term price fluctuations mean in the long term. The revisiting old fields with new extraction techniques, and fracking in the US might have in fact turned the peak into a plateau, but even in the US their production was 7.5 million barrels/day in 1990, to a bottom of 4 in 2006 to '08, and then an increase to 9 in 2014, which is only a net increase of 1.5 from their 1990 production and a drop in the barrel when compared to the declines in those countries mentioned above. And in terms of the world demand that has been between 84 and 94 million per day for the past decade or more. Sooner or later we'll see $100 again and the fabled $200 in my remaining short life. Go figure all this, cause I sure cannot.
Footnote, Syncrude production in 2015 is est to be about 94milion barrels, or slightly more than the world oil demand for 1 day.