The Oil Drum: Europe

Fuel duty and the effect of oil prices on the UK economy

Peak Oil at the Movies: Oil Crash & Crude Impact

75 comments on The forecasting record of CERA and other commentators

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Khebab on December 8, 2006 - 2:07pm

Euan, congratulations for an outstanding post!

Khebab has pointed out I should use logistic and not exponential decline - next time maybe.

I have put the results of the Logistic/Loglets modeling on my blog:

The Loglet Analysis Applied to the United Kingdom's Oil Production

The loglets model suggest a higher decline rate in the future (Ultimate decline rate at 22%).

I have to go for now, more comments later.

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Euan Mearns on December 8, 2006 - 3:58pm

Khabab, Thanks for your input.

One thing I've been looking at visually is how the underlying rate of decline fans towards steeper values with time. So I had already reckoned that using 13% which is the underlying rate now, is probably an underestimate for the future. However, with actual decline running at around 7.6%, that growing to 22% seems a lot.

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Khebab on December 8, 2006 - 6:14pm

I made a mistake in my post above, the ultimate decline rate is in fact K/2 (and not K) which gives 11% (and not 22%).

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Nate Hagens on December 12, 2006 - 6:21pm

The next generation of Brits thanks you and forgives you.

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

DelusionaL on December 13, 2006 - 10:15am

This makes me think that we have a "mirror" to WT's "export land" model. Perhaps he has mentioned it already.

Jeffery Brown (aka WT) we need an import land model as well. If the UK is going to increase the ammount of imported oil it needs to even maitain the status quo....

Is anyone else frighten by this stuff? This looks like it could get very ugly very quickly to me.

I look at all the homes, apartments and town houses around Portland, OR all heated by nat. gas or electric(48% coal fired)-
No trees for fuel, no land to grow food, and ton's of people hooked on electronic toys.
The perfect storm...

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

LoveOregon on December 15, 2006 - 9:33pm

DelusionaL: Think regionally, man. I'm not saying things are in good shape at all here in Portland, but there is vibrant regional agriculture, reasonable mass transit, urban growth boundaries having contained sprawl better than most places in the US, a fairly aware citizenry (well, less bad than many other places, shall we say), fairly high social capital (recall TOD discussions of this about four months ago). There's also fairly high regional identity in Cascadia, something Bob Shaw has pointed to in the past. This is a resource, and it's manifested in many forms, some obviously green but others flying under different colors ("don't Californicate Oregon", etc.).

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

andrew on December 12, 2006 - 9:56pm

given the average decline rate of the above figure (over the last 6 years) of 13%, does anyone know how a prediction of 9% decline can be made? - thats a 30% decrease in decline rate, and from smaller fields which, as has been pointed out on several occasions, have a faster decline rate.

also (i don't think i have the numbers to plot the above graph myself) could someone plot what the general decline rate vs time has been, and extrapolate that to the future?

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Euan Mearns on December 13, 2006 - 5:36am

Andrew - sorry for getting you confused here. The chart above does not show the 48 new fields that have been brought on since 2000. If you include the new fields, the underlying decline rate is reduced from 13% to and actual rate of 7.6% as shown below.

What Khebab is saying is that his modelling suggests the actual decline may accelerate to 11% from 7.6%.

0 Up Down

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

noutram on December 13, 2006 - 2:24pm

Hi Khebab (and the group -this is one of the best researched sites I have found, the depth of some of these analysis is breathtaking),

Some financials.

If this loglet curve is accurate then before 2010 Gordon Brown -the new PM- will have a budget gap of:

=((Use - Production) * No. of days in a year * per barrel price) / $ to £ ratio
=((1,750,000-750,000) * 365 * 60 ) / 2
=approx -£11 Billion / year (Logistics curve gives approx -£3B)

That's a big difference (Cost of current usage is around £20B)

As Oil gets scarcer / more expensive importer countries will increasingly have to devote more and more of their budgets to these increasingly expensive oil imports. If the rest of the economy is unable to make up the difference (and bear in mind the UK is highly service / finance dependant -something that is likely to be badly hit) this will lead to severe hard times.

I went shopping for Christmas gifts at the local Mall the other day -people where spending like there is no tomorrow -and they're right!!

Regards, Nick.