• 2 days U.S. On Track To Unseat Saudi Arabia As No.2 Oil Producer In the World
  • 3 days Senior Interior Dept. Official Says Florida Still On Trump’s Draft Drilling Plan
  • 3 days Schlumberger Optimistic In 2018 For Oilfield Services Businesses
  • 3 days Only 1/3 Of Oil Patch Jobs To Return To Canada After Downturn Ends
  • 3 days Statoil, YPF Finalize Joint Vaca Muerta Development Deal
  • 3 days TransCanada Boasts Long-Term Commitments For Keystone XL
  • 3 days Nigeria Files Suit Against JP Morgan Over Oil Field Sale
  • 3 days Chinese Oil Ships Found Violating UN Sanctions On North Korea
  • 3 days Oil Slick From Iranian Tanker Explosion Is Now The Size Of Paris
  • 4 days Nigeria Approves Petroleum Industry Bill After 17 Long Years
  • 4 days Venezuelan Output Drops To 28-Year Low In 2017
  • 4 days OPEC Revises Up Non-OPEC Production Estimates For 2018
  • 4 days Iraq Ready To Sign Deal With BP For Kirkuk Fields
  • 4 days Kinder Morgan Delays Trans Mountain Launch Again
  • 4 days Shell Inks Another Solar Deal
  • 5 days API Reports Seventh Large Crude Draw In Seven Weeks
  • 5 days Maduro’s Advisors Recommend Selling Petro At Steep 60% Discount
  • 5 days EIA: Shale Oil Output To Rise By 1.8 Million Bpd Through Q1 2019
  • 5 days IEA: Don’t Expect Much Oil From Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Before 2030
  • 5 days Minister Says Norway Must Prepare For Arctic Oil Race With Russia
  • 5 days Eight Years Late—UK Hinkley Point C To Be In Service By 2025
  • 5 days Sunk Iranian Oil Tanker Leave Behind Two Slicks
  • 5 days Saudi Arabia Shuns UBS, BofA As Aramco IPO Coordinators
  • 5 days WCS-WTI Spread Narrows As Exports-By-Rail Pick Up
  • 5 days Norway Grants Record 75 New Offshore Exploration Leases
  • 6 days China’s Growing Appetite For Renewables
  • 6 days Chevron To Resume Drilling In Kurdistan
  • 6 days India Boosts Oil, Gas Resource Estimate Ahead Of Bidding Round
  • 6 days India’s Reliance Boosts Export Refinery Capacity By 30%
  • 6 days Nigeria Among Worst Performers In Electricity Supply
  • 6 days ELN Attacks Another Colombian Pipeline As Ceasefire Ceases
  • 6 days Shell Buys 43.8% Stake In Silicon Ranch Solar
  • 7 days Saudis To Award Nuclear Power Contracts In December
  • 7 days Shell Approves Its First North Sea Oil Project In Six Years
  • 7 days China Unlikely To Maintain Record Oil Product Exports
  • 7 days Australia Solar Power Additions Hit Record In 2017
  • 7 days Morocco Prepares $4.6B Gas Project Tender
  • 7 days Iranian Oil Tanker Sinks After Second Explosion
  • 9 days Russia To Discuss Possible Exit From OPEC Deal
  • 10 days Iranian Oil Tanker Drifts Into Japanese Waters As Fires Rage On
Alt Text

Is An Oil Price Correction Overdue?

Oil prices rallied to 2.5-year…

Alt Text

Grading 2017 Oil Price Predictions

Oil and gas had a…

Alt Text

OPEC Under Pressure As Oil Rally Continues

OPEC is coming under an…

Ferdinand E. Banks

Ferdinand E. Banks

Ferdinand E. Banks, Uppsala University (Sweden), performed his undergraduate studies at Illinois Institute of Technology (electrical engineering) and Roosevelt University (Chicago), graduating with honors in…

More Info

A Disobliging Update on the Price of Oil

A Disobliging Update on the Price of Oil

There still seems to be a deplorable uncertainty about the future price of the most important commodity in the world. A few months ago Philip Verleger – now apparently guest professor at the University of Alberta (Canada) – predicted an oil price of thirty dollars a barrel (= $30/b) for the end of the 2009, and now Mr Chris Watling – chief executive for Longview Economies – forecasts a sharp drop in the oil price (2009). He bases this forecast on an increased oil supply by Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait – who together have about 38 percent of the global oil reserves – and he also envisages  an unchanged or increasing oil production by Canada, Brazil, Angola and Kazakstan.

I won’t waste my time with Verleger’s failed prediction, since instead of $30/b, the year end price for oil was closer to $75/b. But I will say that Mr Verleger has been on the oil conference circuit at least as long as I have, and he should understand the intricacies of the oil market as well as I do. Mr Watling however seems to have an information problem, by which I mean that he has received  too much of that theoretically valuable commodity. He is a victim of what might be called a Greshham-type law: bad  information driving out good.

Watling tells us that Saudi Arabia has increased capacity from 9.5 to 11.5 mb/d in the past five years. Had this been true, President Bush could have stayed home instead of taking a hat-in-hand trip to that country in 2008, when the oil price was closing in on $150/b, and various certified experts were screaming to the high heavens that it could reach $200/b. And the price might have gone that high had a global macroeconomic meltdown not taken place, for which the high oil price was probably more that a little responsible.

Watling also says that Saudi Arabia intends to increase its output to 15 mb/d. That number originated with the Saudi oil minister and not the Saudi head-of-state, which gives it a very different status. Rather than go into the background of this observation, I would like to offer an excruciatingly clear prediction: SAUDI ARABIA WILL NEVER, WILLINGLY, RAISE ITS SUSTAINABLE CAPACITY TO 15 MB/D.  In fact they will not raise it to 12.8 mb/d, which was the last semi-official prediction I saw. Instead that country will produce (and export) as little oil as possible, because the economic theory that I teach tells me that the smaller the amount of oil exported from Saudi Arabia, the greater the economic development they will eventually enjoy – up to a limit of course. I also assume that the Saudi government knows what that limit is, and they know it better than I do.

Kuwait is as sophisticated in these matters as any country in the world. Watling says that their “production trend” will follow that of Saudi Arabia, which means to me that their exports are more likely to fall than rise. That brings us to Iraq, whose output Watling believes will increase from its present 2.5mb/d to 6.2 mb/d by 2017.  I’ll accept this prediction for the simple reason that Russia’s oil production is unlikely to greatly exceed 10 mb/d, while exports will tend to decline because of domestic consumption. Besides, it is not unthinkable that Russia will eventually become a formal or informal member of OPEC, and abide by OPEC quotas.

I also have convinced myself that if the oil price does not escalate too rapidly after the present macroeconomic difficulties have been overcome, the global oil market will have no difficulty absorbing an Iraqui supply increase of the magnitude cited. What about if a Brazilian supply increase is added? I think that I will wait to comment on that possibility, because when it comes to extracting oil from the deep ocean where the new Brazilian reserves are supposedly located, nobody can provide an exact time scheme.

A few comments on the above are in order here. At a recent conference in Siena, Professor Robert Ayres said that the price of energy has been too low. I had some problem accepting this statement, but everything considered, it might make economic sense. Had the oil price been higher, we might be closer to a more optimal energy structure, which in the long run will have to be installed regardless of the incentives or pressures that are necessary to bring it about. Watling also mentioned the peaking of the oil output of Norway and the UK around the end of the last century. On this point several Norwegians have said to me that Norway produced too much oil when its price was below or in the vicinity of $15/b, and the same might be true of the UK.

Perhaps those two countries forgot that all is fair in love, war and international trade. I doubt whether the favours they did or tried to do for the rest of the world would be reciprocated if the situation was reversed. Certainly, it would have been better for them – and perhaps in the long run the rest of us too – if  the oil price had never been allowed to fall as much as it did. That decline also allowed OPEC to find out something about the bad things that could happen for them if they made the wrong decisions about the output of oil.

Someone has questioned me about the economic strategies now being adopted by e.g.  Saudi Arabia  and Kuwait. There seems to be some doubt as to  whether it makes sense now or later to sacrifice comparatively substantial revenues from the production of crude oil in order to achieve a larger future production of petrochemicals and refinery products. When I taught development economics in Sweden and Senegal from the textbook by Howard Chenery and Paul Clark (1962), it was generally understood by every student and teacher who could read and write, and as well do secondary school mathematics, that no country capable of adding value to natural resources via a small or large amount of industrialization should fail to do so, unless of course they preferred less development and prosperity for their citizens as compared to more. I can add that in the case of Saudi Arabia, and probably others who intend to produce an appreciable slice of the international petrochemical cake, it is completely and totally illogical to construct very expensive facilities to achieve this goal, but to earlier export the most important inputs for those facilities – oil and gas.

By Professor Ferdinand E. Banks, Uppsala University (Sweden)


Banks, Ferdinand E. (2008).’The sum of many hopes and fears about the energy
resources of  the Middle East’. Lecture given at the Ecole  Normale
Superieure  (Paris), May 20, 2008
______  (2007). The Political Economy of World Energy: An Introductory  Textbook.
London and  Singapore: World Scientific.
Chenery,  Hollis B. and Paul G.Clarke  (1962).  Interindustry Economics. New
York: Wiley.

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Anonymous on January 13 2010 said:
    Dr Banks should return to teaching out of text books and stay away frm commenting upon something he has no experience with or knowledge of. How accurate were his predictions that world oil supply and demand would come to balance in 1973 and 2003 because fifteen years of manipulated, non-inflation adjusted, low oil prices, i.e., 1958-1973 and 1986-2003, causing oil prices to multiply tenfold?
  • Anonymous on January 15 2010 said:
    I think that this can be easily settled. The only time that I have seen an oil well was from the window of a troop train, and I might have been slightly under the weather. As for textbooks however, my two energy economics textbooks are the best that have been written at this time in history, unfortunately. If there were anything as good, I would be the first to read them.I can also mention that the only time I have written anything about oil that I regretted was when I said that the oil market would be in balance in l985.
  • Anonymous on February 04 2010 said:
    Good point about Saudi Arabia, the same applies to UAE and probably Kuwait; and that's nothing about having seen an oil well, that's about (a) politics and (b) the fact that there are a number of oild producers that think they will be better off in the long term if they hold onto their oil and wait for "peak oil" to drive up the price than to pump it, take the money which is surplus to their immediate requirements, and try and make a return investing it outside of their country.

    On that note, you might be interested in http://seekingalpha.com/article/140546-the-price-of-oil-parasite-economics-explained

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News