page-loading-spinner

Chris Martenson

In this Martenson Report for subscribers, I continue with Part II of our discussion on what the next oil supply crunch will mean and steps you might take today to lessen the impact.

Oil – The Coming Supply Crunch (Part II)

Here’s a snippet:


Executive Summary

  • Explaining Oil Pricing – oil prices are "set at the margin"
  • Oil Storage – When it’s pumped out of the ground it has to go somewhere
  • Oil Price Behavior – slight supply and demand imbalances drive prices
  • The Total Shortfall – too little oil to support a robust recovery
  • Nothing Fails Like Success – the worst thing would be a rapid economic recovery
  • Timing – when will Oil Shock III arrive?
  • What should you do?
  • Investments, food, selecting a community, and an abbreviated buy list

In Part I of this report, I laid out the case that the
combination of declines in the production output of existing oilfields and a
lack of investment in new oil fields would lay the foundation for Oil Shock
III.

This report will examine Oil Shock III by painting a number
of possible scenarios, and then discuss steps you might take to weather the
storm, when it arrives. I will help you
translate current news and future projections into actionable information. My goal is to help you better understand what
is going on and what you can personally do about it.

New Martenson Report: Oil – The Coming Supply Crunch (Part II)

In this Martenson Report for subscribers, I continue with Part II of our discussion on what the next oil supply crunch will mean and steps you might take today to lessen the impact.

Oil – The Coming Supply Crunch (Part II)

Here’s a snippet:


Executive Summary

  • Explaining Oil Pricing – oil prices are "set at the margin"
  • Oil Storage – When it’s pumped out of the ground it has to go somewhere
  • Oil Price Behavior – slight supply and demand imbalances drive prices
  • The Total Shortfall – too little oil to support a robust recovery
  • Nothing Fails Like Success – the worst thing would be a rapid economic recovery
  • Timing – when will Oil Shock III arrive?
  • What should you do?
  • Investments, food, selecting a community, and an abbreviated buy list

In Part I of this report, I laid out the case that the
combination of declines in the production output of existing oilfields and a
lack of investment in new oil fields would lay the foundation for Oil Shock
III.

This report will examine Oil Shock III by painting a number
of possible scenarios, and then discuss steps you might take to weather the
storm, when it arrives. I will help you
translate current news and future projections into actionable information. My goal is to help you better understand what
is going on and what you can personally do about it.

A new Martenson Report is ready for subscribers.


Link:
Oil – The Coming Supply Crunch (Part I)


A snippet from the opening:

This is one of the most important Martenson Reports I will write this
year.
In this report, I explain
why the global stimulus plan will not succeed at returning the global economy
to a path of sustainable growth or even to its former heights, seen in
2006/2007.

A snippet from the conclusion: 


The assumption by the G20 that money printed out of thin air is both necessary and sufficient to return us to a renewed path of global economic growth is deeply flawed. Trillions of dollars in new stimulus money will soon “find their mark” and stampede off looking for something to do. The energy to support all this money does not exist, at least if the independent efforts of three diverse institutions that have studied the data are to be trusted (and I do because their conclusions are so similar).


The combination of rapid declines in existing fields and a collapse in oil field investment means that it is extremely unlikely that we’ll have enough oil to return the globe to robust growth.


While it is possible that we’ll close some of the energy gap with efficiency measures, a decade or more of lead-time sits between the development of more efficient technologies and their full market penetration, which means that efficiency is unlikely to play anything other than a bit part in this developing drama.


Any plan to stimulate growth that does not take this energy reality into account is highly suspect and is probably flawed. Why this most obvious of all connections is not being openly discussed will be for future historians to dissect. For now, it is up to each of us to define for ourselves how much importance we place in this line of thinking.

Martenson Report Ready – Oil Shock III

A new Martenson Report is ready for subscribers.


Link:
Oil – The Coming Supply Crunch (Part I)


A snippet from the opening:

This is one of the most important Martenson Reports I will write this
year.
In this report, I explain
why the global stimulus plan will not succeed at returning the global economy
to a path of sustainable growth or even to its former heights, seen in
2006/2007.

A snippet from the conclusion: 


The assumption by the G20 that money printed out of thin air is both necessary and sufficient to return us to a renewed path of global economic growth is deeply flawed. Trillions of dollars in new stimulus money will soon “find their mark” and stampede off looking for something to do. The energy to support all this money does not exist, at least if the independent efforts of three diverse institutions that have studied the data are to be trusted (and I do because their conclusions are so similar).


The combination of rapid declines in existing fields and a collapse in oil field investment means that it is extremely unlikely that we’ll have enough oil to return the globe to robust growth.


While it is possible that we’ll close some of the energy gap with efficiency measures, a decade or more of lead-time sits between the development of more efficient technologies and their full market penetration, which means that efficiency is unlikely to play anything other than a bit part in this developing drama.


Any plan to stimulate growth that does not take this energy reality into account is highly suspect and is probably flawed. Why this most obvious of all connections is not being openly discussed will be for future historians to dissect. For now, it is up to each of us to define for ourselves how much importance we place in this line of thinking.

Okay, this is really just desperate and sad. No I am not referring to my fixation on parsing government numbers, although I suppose I could be, but instead to government statistical wizardry and the press’ unquestioning rhetorical support for these tortured numbers.

First up, here’s the verbiage:

Durable goods jump 3.4

WASHINGTON (Reuters) — New orders for long-lasting manufactured goods unexpectedly rebounded in February, rising for the first time in seven months, according to a government report on Wednesday that could bring some cheer to an economy mired in recession.

Here’s the NY Times’ opening take on the situation:

In a glimmer of surprisingly upbeat economic data, manufacturing orders for goods like metals, machines and military equipment rose last month for the first time after six months of declines, the government reported on Wednesday.

That’s quite amazing. Durables “unexpectedly rebounded,” bringing the cheer of “a glimmer of surprisingly upbeat economic data” to an economy mired in recession.

Well, it turns out that there’s another little game that is frequently played with these numbers and it’s called “the downward revision.” The game is played like this: In a prior month, in this case January, a slightly “better than expected number” is posted, causing the stock market to react with glee (at least temporarily).

More Fuzzy Numbers – Durables

Okay, this is really just desperate and sad. No I am not referring to my fixation on parsing government numbers, although I suppose I could be, but instead to government statistical wizardry and the press’ unquestioning rhetorical support for these tortured numbers.

First up, here’s the verbiage:

Durable goods jump 3.4

WASHINGTON (Reuters) — New orders for long-lasting manufactured goods unexpectedly rebounded in February, rising for the first time in seven months, according to a government report on Wednesday that could bring some cheer to an economy mired in recession.

Here’s the NY Times’ opening take on the situation:

In a glimmer of surprisingly upbeat economic data, manufacturing orders for goods like metals, machines and military equipment rose last month for the first time after six months of declines, the government reported on Wednesday.

That’s quite amazing. Durables “unexpectedly rebounded,” bringing the cheer of “a glimmer of surprisingly upbeat economic data” to an economy mired in recession.

Well, it turns out that there’s another little game that is frequently played with these numbers and it’s called “the downward revision.” The game is played like this: In a prior month, in this case January, a slightly “better than expected number” is posted, causing the stock market to react with glee (at least temporarily).

Total 1851 items