Estimate about oil price in the near future?

I foresee the price of oil will raise in the future gradually. This is my viewpoint about condition of oil in the next months.
Whats your notion herein? Please declare your reasons.

I think it cannot become any cheaper than it is now, simply because in many countries they are selling oil at operation cost. Below that level they simply shut drilling down until prices go up again.

Yesterday I saw a news item on tv about a Dutch oil company owner in Texas who has invented a new kind of drill that makes fracking cheaper. If that can be used, operational costs will go down and then oil might become cheaper. But for now I think it will go up.

As far as I know, oil price rose to $100 or more a few years ago. Up to the time, increasing oil price occurred every year in an usual and regular rate ( price tilt-shift was almost fixed for years) but dropping oil price was sudden and unexpected. It was approximately like a negative vertical tilt.
In fact, what was the cause of sudden dropping of the price? What happened in the international markets of oil that petroleum crashed down?
.

Mansoor said:

As far as I know, oil price rose to $100 or more a few years ago. Up to the time, increasing oil price occurred every year in an usual and regular rate ( price tilt-shift was almost fixed for years) but dropping oil price was sudden and unexpected. It was approximately like a negative vertical tilt.
In fact, what was the cause of sudden dropping of the price? What happened in the international markets of oil that petroleum crashed down?
.

Click to expand...

Reduced global diamond after the 2008 recession and increased production in the U.S. (and perhaps other regions) using new technology such as fracking.

Low oil prices are killing Alaska's budget, and lay-offs in the oil and oil-support industries will soon cripple the economy. Though the Republicans in our legislature are kicking and screaming, it's inevitable that we'll soon have to implement income and sales taxes. This will be a big step for Alaskans, who are used to despising government and not having to pay for it.

I bet Iran's economy isn't faring well under current oil prices; but perhaps the recent lifting of economic sanctions will help there. Be sure to tell all your friends to visit Alaska and spend lots of money.

So, yeah. Fracking drove the price of natural gas through the floor which took pressure off of oil demand (there are power plants that can burn whatever is cheapest at the moment, and some heating solutions are flexible in the fuel they use, plus newly installed heating or power generation systems will pick the cheapest fuel at the moment, most of the time).

At the same time as a worldwide economic slowdown (recession in many areas, slowed growth in others) which also reduced oil demand. Meanwhile, the smaller OPEC nations also felt the pressure of the economic slowdown and didn't agree to cut production when Saudi Arabia asked them to do so. So the middle east remained in maximum oil production even as the price dropped, which glutted the market more, dropping the price more. Saudi Arabia decided to let that spiral -keep- going. While it hurts them in the short term, in the long term, if the price of oil gets low enough, then producers with high overhead go out of business.

That's what's happening now - The U.S. has high labor costs and many of its fields require difficult and expensive extraction. Net result - many small oil producers going out of business, and expensive extraction operations owned by large business are being put on hold. Adding up to 500,000 barrels of oil per *day* that the U.S. has stopped producing. There are similar effects around the globe, but the U.S. reduction is the most significant both in volume and in impact on prices.

Oil prices should continue to rise until it becomes worthwhile to re-open expensive wells, and then increased U.S. production will ease the demand and stablize the price. I expect that to be around $80/barrel, but there are a lot of wildcard factors involved.

The unusual thing about US production is that it is so fluid/flexible when compared to most other producers in the world. If the price goes down, things stop; if it goes back up, things start back up. Alongside that is some of the most innovative extraction tech in the business.

Sure the Dakotas have backed off, and Alaska is in the red, but read this about texas: Texas Isn't Scared of $30 Oil - Bloomberg
IMO, it's not the US producers that are getting hurt, it's countries that are getting hurt--countries with (a) high production costs, and (b) that are also heavily reliant on oil for their budgets.

Also, there's coal (and coal companies, which are going bankrupt at a record pace). Low oil prices, along with environmental regs, have pretty much gutted the coal industry. US shale oil/gas producers will be back and going gangbusters before coal makes a comeback

RolandtheHeadless said:

Low oil prices are killing Alaska's budget, and lay-offs in the oil and oil-support industries will soon cripple the economy. Though the Republicans in our legislature are kicking and screaming, it's inevitable that we'll soon have to implement income and sales taxes. This will be a big step for Alaskans, who are used to despising government and not having to pay for it.

I bet Iran's economy isn't faring well under current oil prices; but perhaps the recent lifting of economic sanctions will help there. Be sure to tell all your friends to visit Alaska and spend lots of money.

Click to expand...

Yes crisis of oil price is an international problem and all oil- producing countries are involved in, among Iran.
Due to this reason and also possibility of continuing unfair economy sanctions, Iran government is obligated to implement " withstanding economy" or " resistive economy" and it is an economy system that uses all public and national capacities, manages consumption and also boosts industry and agriculture sectors.

As Chri hinted, Saudis in Arabia are one of the reasons of dropping oil price and it is because they don't accord themselves with OPEC management and stubbornly product oil unlimited. They don't think wisely about Arabia oil reserves and are wasting them stupidly, in this temporary condition of low oil price.
If Saudi family empty Arabia oil wells, they will become a group of beggars (although it is just a supposition now) because their industry and agriculture score is zero and they are only reliant on oil sale.
However, they are one of the important reasons of dropping price of oil.

Mansoor said:

As Chri hinted, Saudis in Arabia are one of the reasons of dropping oil price and it is because they don't accord themselves with OPEC management and stubbornly product oil unlimited. They don't think wisely about Arabia oil reserves and are wasting them stupidly, in this temporary condition of low oil price.
If Saudi family empty Arabia oil wells, they will become a group of beggars (although it is just a supposition now) because their industry and agriculture score is zero and they are only reliant on oil sale.
However, they are one of the important reasons of dropping price of oil.

Click to expand...

I think you are underestimating the Saudis. They have very deep pockets, unlike some smaller countries and corporations, and also they have access to very easily produced oil. They make less, of course, but they still profit with low oil prices.

Not everyone is in that position - others may not have deep pockets and may not have oil that is profitable in the current market. By continuing to keep the price of oil low, they are driving competition out of business - it takes resources to shut down or re-open a well, but when the oil costs more to produce than it sells for, what else can you do? This will drive some smaller corporations out of business, and put some countries with national oil in a position where they will have trouble restoring their capacity when prices rebound.

If it works out like that, then the Saudis will have a larger proportion of active capacity when prices rebound.

Of course it may not work out that way, especially if prices are actually rebounding already now. But I think it is a mistake to assume the Saudis are simply being 'stupid'. I think they're being quite crafty.

Yesterday I head in the news, OPEC members among Saudi's delegate gathered in Doha to determine to reduce their oil productions. This is the most rational decision in this bad situation of oil and gas market.

Iran didn't participate in the gathering, because it is in the situation of beginning phase of regression to a regular oil exportation after the unfair economic sanctions and now its production is lower the amount of the oil exportation before the sanctions. At the time, oil sale of Iran was about 3 million barrel per day but now, after sanctions it is about 2,2 million barrel. The oil minister of Iran expressed, " there is about 700 thousands barrel oil shortage in our exportation in compare with the prior time of the sanctions. until this shortage is not resolved, we will not reduce our production."
Nonetheless, Iran supported the sitting of OPEC members and the minister of oil of Iran sent his thanks to the delegates of this organization because of their good decision for treatment the illness of oil market.

Oops! How about that oil price decline today...!?!?!

Saudis, Saudis,Saudis! This regnant family are the key reason of crisis of oil price.
They are like a group of baby snakes that are seen everywhere in the world and king of Saudi is a serpent that swallow every national wealth of Arabia nation!
In the Doha session, Solomon Abdul Aziz, didn't agree to freeze Arabia oil production for a while. His purpose is not money, he just wish to accuse Iran in political scene unfairly.

As I told previously, essentially Iran oil exportation is low because of 12 years the unfair economic sanctions. In that period of the time Iran wasn't present in the international oil market and now its production is low. At present, Iran is not like other oil producer countries and have to offset its oil exportation shortage, therefore it didn't participate in Doha session but supported the community of those delegates.

Saudis said untruly in the western medias, Iran has boycotted Doha meeting and is not agree with adjusting oil price!

Well, if you refuse to attend the meeting, you're boycotting it.

Those "unfair sanctions" were imposed to discourage Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. It seems they may have worked; but time will tell whether Iran complies with its agreements.

RolandtheHeadless said:

Well, if you refuse to attend the meeting, you're boycotting it.

Those "unfair sanctions" were imposed to discourage Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. It seems they may have worked; but time will tell whether Iran complies with its agreements.

Click to expand...

Ronald, boycott does mean banning somethings based on an intense disagreement or protest.
Iran was not disagree with the Doha session. It even supported the representations and Iran oil minister sent a thank to them for their good decision. But in the meeting Saudis deliberately obstructed a good consequence and refused declining their oil extraction.

That was an baseless accusation. The power of Iran is not its weaponry and military aspects. The power of Iran is its popular ideology and humanly policy. People and independent governments attract to Iran because of its fairly policies and humanly interactions.
Iran doesn't tend to selfishness, nationalism, racism, supremacy and seniority to others. Iran encounter other nations and governments kindly and mercifully and it is because of its great ideological backing.
Iranian are wealthy culturally, lean on their national properties and don't greed to the wealth and territory of other peoples. Iranian wish to have a fairly deal and relationship with other people and live honorably and humanly.
Iran doesn't need to a hellish weapon like nuclear bomb that threatens human society and destroy the earth. We wish to serve humans not to hurt them. We wish to build not to destruct. We wish to live beside other humans not to miss them.

Iran peacefully achieved nuclear energy technology which was just prerogative of developed countries. That was the cause which made western governments and Israel angry at Iran!
They didn't expect Iran can achieve this high technology!

They applied economy sanctions on Iran because we grew up in this technology, not because we were going to produce nuclear bomb!
Western governments knew very well that Iran was clear of any nuclear weapon and didn't want to produce such anti-human bombs. So why they applied the sanctions?
Because they wanted to take down our peaceful achievements in the nuclear energy technology. They wanted compel Iran to give up its highest and most valuable scientific and technological achievement and return to backwardness!

However, we eventually proved the world that Iran thought humanly and never had a program to make nuclear weapon, from the beginning, and all the pressures and sanctions versus Iran was a series of deliberately plans to stop Iran going advance in technology

No one cares whether Iran develops peaceful nuclear energy, so long as there is no leakage and nuclear waste is disposed of responsibly. Japan, France, Germany, the US, and other nations all have nuclear power plants.

It appears that Iran was trying to develop atomic bombs and long-range missiles in order to counter Israel's Bomb and perhaps to deter any US invasion (after seeing what happened to Iraq). ("The Bomb" is my generation's euphemism for nuclear weapons.)The problem is that if Iran obtains the Bomb, Saudi, Pakistan, the UAE, and others will want it too. No one builds an ICBM unless they plan to put nuclear warheads on it. If Iran only wanted to build power plants, it wouldn't need to be buying technology from the North Koreans. Lots of western nations share nuclear power plant technology, and none of them conspire against the other. Not over this matter, at least.

The above arguments are based on circumstantial evidence, inference, and speculation. But they are logical and a reasonable interpretation of the available evidence. Iran has, up until now, refused to allow IAEA inspections, so all the direct evidence has been concealed. The concealment itself leads to an inference there is something to hide. The Washington Post noted that the issue of whether Iran has been trying to build a Bomb is unclear.

"2. So is Iran building a nuclear bomb or not?

"It's not clear. The United States and several other countries believe that Iran is trying to develop the technology and fissile material necessary to build a nuclear weapon. There's an important distinction here: Western intelligence agencies have not concluded that Iran has decided to definitely build a bomb. Rather, they've reported lots of signs -- secret facilities, weapons-relatedresearch programs -- that suggest that Iran is trying to develop the technology and materials necessary to build a nuclear bomb very quickly. This is called "breakout capability," as in Iran would have the ability to quickly "break out" into a full-fledged nuclear weapons state.

"The United Nations' nuclear watchdog hasn't definitively concluded that Iran is doing this, but it has reported some very worrying signs and says it can't state confidently that the program is peaceful. Iran has also dodged inspections and built secret facilities, which is not exactly reassuring anybody.

"The world is so worried about Iran's nuclear intentions that, starting in 2006, even China and Russia joined with the rest of the United Nations Security Council -- a small, powerful body of world powers -- in ordering Iran to "suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development." Iran has not complied, insisting that its program is a point of national prestige and independence. It's been punished severely with economic sanctions, including on its vast oil and gas industry."

9 questions about Iran's nuclear program you were too embarrassed to ask - The Washington Post

The above article is somewhat dated, since it was written before the recent agreement that lifted sanctions in exchange for allowing IAEA inspections. I very much hope the agreement holds and is honored by both sides.

You seem like a good person, Mansoor. I can only believe that your government doesn't tell you the whole story. I suggest you may wish to use the internet to research this issue.

I told before attaching nuclear bomb production was just a great and unfair accusation to Iran. I explained already that Iran is opposite to every type of nuclear weapon.
Ronald, you make me surprised that you have not believed in this truth yet.
Do you deny AEOU ( Atomic Energy Organization of United Nations) and even America government official acknowledges?!

Or do you believe that America and its confederate countries were forced to sign the international agreement documents of " Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action" (JCPOA)?!

Please notice that denying those international agreements and documents and attaching the other accusations to Iran is false.

Producing conventional weapons is among the rights of military forces of every country that have to defend their borders against probable invasion of aliens!
Saddam in Iraq attacked Iran because he supposed the army of Iran has been unable after the Islamic revolution and changes of governmental system. He never expected that people of Iran support their army as thousands of devotee militias, despite their inexperience of a war in the beginning (the same occurrence that happened in Yemen now).
At the start of the imposed war our heavy weapons and also readiness of Iran army was unequal against Saddam's army, especially against his armored corps. Thousands of militias offset the shortage with R.P.G and the other light weapons that the military operations were the heroic and historical defense!

Saddam failed, and could not move forward in the borders of Iran, and even his army was driven out from the small areas of Iran that they had occupied in the beginning of the war.

However, in the eight-year war that Iranians call it " holly defense" Iran achieved the high military experiences. The highest experience was this slogan:
" Manufacture your own defensive weapons and strengthen your own defensive forces, because in this pitiless world that live some greedy wolves too, nobody will help you to save your territory and people, except you"!

The ballistic missiles of Iran is one of the result of this idea. Those are some deterrent weapons that make enemies worried to think attack to Iran again.
If Iran didn't develop its conventional defensive weapons, especially its missile force, it would be unclear that the boundaries of Iran wasn't in danger.
Now our enemies, especially Israel, Saudi and Daesh fear to think about a war against Iran. Our destroyer and powerful missile force is like a nightmare for these hostiles and deter them to think about an unwisely action versus Iran.
But nonetheless Iran is a peaceful and friendly country and it had noting to do with those enemies that don't do any military operation against Iran. In this situation Iranian dragons will remain inactive in their nests and never will be fired toward any target.

In the 2000s, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United Nations unanimously found Iran to be not in compliance with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty. You may not like this fact, but nevertheless those were the findings, and that was the reason for the UN sanctions.

The UN wasn't arguing against Iran's right to self-defense. The UN was responding to the International Atomic Energy Agency's findings in regard to enrichment of uranium.

Just a side note: "Ronald" should actually be Roland, as he mentioned in his post on April 6th.

Majestic said:

In the 2000s, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United Nations unanimously found Iran to be not in compliance with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty. You may not like this fact, but nevertheless those were the findings, and that was the reason for the UN sanctions.

The UN wasn't arguing against Iran's right to self-defense. The UN was responding to the International Atomic Energy Agency's findings in regard to enrichment of uranium.

Just a side note: "Ronald" should actually be Roland, as he mentioned in his post on April 6th.

Click to expand...

When Iran achieved Atomic Energy Technology, an massive propaganda was launched versus Iran, in the west. The western governments, especially America and also Israel regime in the middle east rumored in the medias that Iran is going to produce nuclear bomb, while we were just in the beginning!
It was clear that the west and also Israel regime were rumoring some untrue news, but we hadn't any accesses to the western medias to deny those untrue words clearly.

Over the years they continued their propaganda while Iran was the member of " International Atomic Energy Agency" and its atomic activity was under the rules of this organization!

IAEA never found something that it shows that Iran is going to use uranium for a military purpose.

When we allowed this agency to visit our atomic installations and laboratories wholly, we were sure about our nuclear activity that it was quite peacefully and humanity. We didn't want to produce nuclear weapon so why we had to be worried?

Now it is clear that IAEA didn't find any evidence that proved we intended to produce nuclear bomb and all our activities were peacefully and were based on IAEA rules.

But I have an important question:

Do America and Israel allow "International Atomic Energy Agency" to visit their nuclear installations and "Arsenals of atomic bombs" !!

And whether they obey this international agency's rules to stop "producing Nuclear bombs"!!

Iran is a member of the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Unlike North Korea, Iran has never withdrawn from the treaty, whose intent is to limit nuclear weapons to members who already had them at the time the treaty was signed. Wikipedia has this to say:

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, is an international treatywhose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.[1]

Opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty entered into force in 1970. On 11 May 1995, the Treaty was extended indefinitely. More countries have adhered to the NPT than any other arms limitation and disarmament agreement, a testament to the Treaty's significance.[1] A total of 191 states have joined the Treaty, though North Korea, which acceded to the NPT in 1985 but never came into compliance, announced its withdrawal in 2003.[2] Four UN member states have never joined the NPT: India, Israel, Pakistan and South Sudan.

The treaty recognizes five states as nuclear-weapon states: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China (also the fivepermanent members of the United Nations Security Council). Four other states are known or believed to possess nuclear weapons: India, Pakistanand North Korea have openly tested and declared that they possess nuclear weapons, while Israel has had a policy of opacity regarding its nuclear weapons program.

Mansoor said:

IAEA never found something that it shows that Iran is going to use uranium for a military purpose.

Click to expand...

This isn't the problem. The problem was Iran's failure to disclose things they are obligated to disclose. So the question becomes, why did Iran carry out these developments in secret?

The UN security council is not a group of US allies. For the UN Security Council to vote unanimously for something, that thing must be significant. Russia and China to do not vote for something out of sympathy for the US.

Under the non-proliferation treaty, the US is obliged to reduce its nuclear stockpile, which it has been doing since 1968.
Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance | Arms Control Association

Israel never joined to NTP while this occupant regime has about 200 nuclear bombs and is a serious danger in the middle east and south Asia because of its militant character!

Why America and Europe didn't put Israel under political and economy pressure to stop its nuclear military purpose and disassemble all its nuclear bombs and missiles?
Why UN and its sub-organization, IAEA have not dropped in Palestine to see what Israelis are doing in their nuclear installations and how they have produced a lot of Atomic bombs and missiles!

Iran was under an unfair and lawless political and economy pressure for years because of the Atomic bombs that they never existed in Iran!

Instead, Israelis are free from international laws and International Atomic Energy Agency's supervision, despite its all nuclear bombs!

What is this two different standard about one topic, while law is one?!
It is not an acceptable excuse for Israel that it had made its nuclear bombs before NPT date!

If nuclear bomb is the highest danger for human on the earth, especially in Israel that is a militant regime with a low policy, so UNO should enforce Zionists to eliminate all their banned bombs.

But will this happen?

Will Israel be enforced to clean Palestine from its atomic bombs?
Will America and Europe encounter Zionists in Palestine as they encounter innocent Iran?

I think the answer is foggy, because Israel is supported by western countries and is considered as an exceptional case against International laws!
The other fact is that, Israelis were not able to achieve Atomic technology in Palestine and they received (or maybe stole) this technology from Europe or America.

However, United Nation Organization is the highest responsible to secure and safe the world against those governments and armies that have access to nuclear bomb. It should makes a law that it obligates these governments to destroy all their Atomic weapons.

Iran will try to excite and encourage UN to approve such law in the next. The law will be one the most important and sensitive laws for security of mankind.

Majestic said:

This isn't the problem. The problem was Iran's failure to disclose things they are obligated to disclose. So the question becomes, why did Iran carry out these developments in secret?

The UN security council is not a group of US allies. For the UN Security Council to vote unanimously for something, that thing must be significant. Russia and China to do not vote for something out of sympathy for the US.

Under the non-proliferation treaty, the US is obliged to reduce its nuclear stockpile, which it has been doing since 1968.
Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance | Arms Control Association

Click to expand...

Majestic, what you are saying is what published in the western medias before of approval of " Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action" treaty.
At the time the west tried to accuse Iran in the eye of UN, governments and people of the world by spreading such rumors.

Iran never concealed anything that was included the rules of IAEA, except those topics that was out of the tasks of this agency and was relative to national security of Iran.

Iran doesn't recognize Israel as a country, so how can they think the country of Israel has atomic weapons?

After all, it's not a country, right? So it can't be held to rules about nations, right?

Mansoor said:

Majestic, what you are saying is what published in the western medias before of approval of " Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action" treaty.

Click to expand...

I am talking about the sanctions that the international community imposed on Iran after the IAEA found Iran to be in breach of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It isn't a "US versus Iran" issue. It is the international community trying to find a non-violent way to get Iran to keep the promises that Iran signed up to.