University of Alaska Fairbanks professor predicts spike in oil prices
by Jeff Richardson / jrichardson@newsminer.com
Jan 04, 2012 | 9357 views | 42 42 comments | 13 13 recommendations | email to a friend | print
FAIRBANKS — Gasoline prices in the $4-per-gallon range may be uncomfortably high for many Fairbanks residents, but Doug Reynolds believes prices in the years ahead could make these seem like the good old days.

Reynolds, a professor of oil and energy economics at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, said he sees oil prices soaring in the next five to 10 years, “easily” reaching $200 per barrel or more.

That increase, roughly double the current price of oil, would translate into gasoline in the $5 to $10 range at the pump, he said.

“(Prices) are going to get higher … The progression is clear,” Reynolds said.

Reynolds, the author of a soon-to-be released book about global oil dependence called “Energy Civilization,” spoke Tuesday at a Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce luncheon about the growing demand for oil and the effect it will have on prices.

Reynolds said the current reality of “peak oil” — the period when global petroleum extraction begins to decline — and an expected surge in oil demand in developing countries will contribute to an upcoming price spike.

“We’re going to go through a tremendous 10- to 20-year difficult transition,” he said.

Reynolds said more developing nations are reaching a level of affluence that allows families to begin purchasing cars. In a country such as India, that could translate into millions more vehicles on the road, adding another contributor to worldwide demand for petroleum.

Meanwhile, extracting petroleum is becoming more difficult. While some new energy sources hold promise, such as shale oil, he said it will be tough to replace the role that traditional petroleum extraction has played in modern civilization.

Shale oil requires a huge amount of energy to extract, making its investment return different than traditional petroleum drilling. Gas, such as methane, requires massive up-front costs to create a distribution network.

Climbing oil prices may be good for the state treasury, which relies heavily on oil taxes. But Reynolds said those factors will be the continued force behind high gas prices in Alaska, despite the presence of an oil pipeline running through its backyard.

The difference between local gas prices and those in the Lower 48 spurs occasional calls for state investigations into price gouging. Seattle, for example, currently pays at least 40 cents less per gallon than Anchorage, according to the gasbuddy.com website.

Reynolds said Fairbanks’ size works against it when compared to larger Outside markets, along with the higher cost of doing business in Alaska. He said bigger, cheaper markets can create more competition and be more nimble in adjusting their prices, since those fixed costs can be spread over millions of customers.

“I don’t think we’re getting gouged,” he said. “We’re a small market, and small markets are more volatile than big markets.”

Contact staff writer Jeff Richardson at 459-7518.
Comments
(42)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
TreeThunderchild
|
January 06, 2012


I didn't aim to do this but realized the other day that a wind turbine I made, I sold for twice my cost of materials, for half the price of the equivalent power output of made in China.



Just saying... the above math does not take into consideration, unforeseen variables such as changes that spontaneously take place all over the world.

The Wright brothers, Ford, Bill Gates, Tesla, and many others being the examples of something American citizens are in the habit of, changing the world, in their work shops, and garages. World changing is something we seem to be rather well noted for, yet little consideration of this constant variable is given here.
1TarBaby
|
January 05, 2012
childofsol 8 Hours AgoSeventy percent of reserves, and less than 45% of world production. As for spare production capacity, I don't know, and neither do you. There are some knowledgeable people, including a Saudi or two - who think that spare capacity is virtually nonexistent.

What people think is not the issue. However what they do IS.

It is a political decision to tax oil till the Fairbanks price is $4.24. What the Saudi's has -000 effect on the price Ak state sells your royalty oil to the local refiners along the pipe line.

Weatherer or not we put up it and continue electing legislators from Fairbanks and the interior I a political decision made by the voters.

Your current crop of politicians are more interested in protecting their campaign contributers than the general well being of ALL those living in their district.

That is why out of each $4,000 you spend on heating fuel at least $3,000 goes into the public till.

Any one feeling sheered, accept me?

LadyNYC
|
January 05, 2012
1TB, you might want to continue your discussion on the Peak oil/resource depletion thread in the forums section. Looks like this article is already in the archive section . . .

And yes, I for one am feeling fleeced as well. Alaska's somehow got an adversarial relationship with its residents - what's good for the state's coffers is bad for the citizens' wallets.

The pain in the wallet does have a political source, and there is some relief that the state government can offer. But ultimately, oil is a dwindling resource, and as such, it will only get more expensive in the long run. Tremendously so, I fear.
1TarBaby
|
January 06, 2012
Where does the "state" spend it's money? On what?

What benefits 50 % John Q Public? How about 90% us?

Vs is just making WPA "jobs" to distribute the tax money into the company at $100,000 head.

Notice when you call the "state" offices all you get is answering machines.

Try pressing "0" for a human some time.

childofsol
|
January 05, 2012
Seventy percent of reserves, and less than 45% of world production. As for spare production capacity, I don't know, and neither do you. There are some knowledgeable people, including a Saudi or two - who think that spare capacity is virtually nonexistent. Venezuela holds more reserves than SA (the largest OPEC producer), but it's mostly heavy oil that is expensive to refine. We can probably look forward to increasing Chinese investment in Venezuelan oil production.

Regardless, the demand trends drive by China, India, and others coupled with the increasing ratio of expensive oil in the mix will ensure that prices will continue to rise. Or, given that high prices almost always lead to recession or collapse, it is more accurate to say that there is a high probability that economic growth will continue to slow down and eventually cease.
1TarBaby
|
January 05, 2012
The TV news just reported, 70 % of the of oil's price is price crude.

In our case: If crude is 70% of a $4.5 gal of heating oil the State is making $3.15 per gallon.

1,000 gallons of heating is $4,500 of that $3,150 is royalty oil tax.
1TarBaby
|
January 05, 2012
1TarBaby

|

Less Than A Minute Ago

childofsol 9 Hours Ago Tarbaby How much spare production capacity do the OPEC nations have?

-- OPEC says it has control of 70% of world production.

grinch41
|
January 04, 2012
Our gas prices are middle-of-road compared to many nations:

Price in USD Regular/Gallon



Netherlands Amsterdam $6.48

Norway Oslo $6.27

Italy Milan $5.96

Denmark Copenhagen $5.93

Belgium Brussels $5.91

Sweden Stockholm $5.80

United Kingdom London $5.79

Germany Frankfurt $5.57

France Paris $5.54

Portugal Lisbon $5.35

Hungary Budapest $4.94

Luxembourg $4.82

Croatia Zagreb $4.81

Ireland Dublin $4.78

Switzerland Geneva $4.74

Spain Madrid $4.55

Japan Tokyo $4.24

Czech Republic Prague $4.19

Romania Bucharest $4.09

Andorra $4.08

Estonia Tallinn $3.62

Bulgaria Sofia $3.52

Brazil Brasilia $3.12

Cuba Havana $3.03

Taiwan Taipei $2.84

Lebanon Beirut $2.63

South Africa Johannesburg $2.62

Nicaragua Managua $2.61

Panama Panama City $2.19

Russia Moscow $2.10

Puerto Rico San Juan $1.74

Saudi Arabia Riyadh $0.91

Kuwait Kuwait City $0.78

Egypt Cairo $0.65

Nigeria Lagos $0.38

Venezuela Caracas $0.12

Source: air-inc.com

1TarBaby
|
January 05, 2012
This is Alaska not Europe which has something like 600% tax on oil.

In oil producing countries where the state owns the oil just like the State of Alaska -- this part of the list is applicable.

Saudi Arabia Riyadh $0.91

Kuwait Kuwait City $0.78

Egypt Cairo $0.65

Nigeria Lagos $0.38

Venezuela Caracas $0.12

It would not hurt if the DNM fix this half sassed program to know difference between 1 carriage return

and 2

childofsol
|
January 05, 2012
Tarbaby

You might want to take a look at this, specifically the chart which shows fuel subsidies by country:

'IEA Review Shows Many Developing Countries Subsidize Fossil Fuel Consumption, Creating Artificially Lower Oil Prices'

"On a per-person basis, fossil fuel consumption subsidies are highest for Kuwait at $2,798.6 per person, the United Arab Emirates at $2,489.6, and Saudi Arabia at $1,586.6"

"The IEA has been advocating for years that fossil fuel consumption subsidies should be eliminated since they encourage wasteful consumption"

Not to mention economic problems for many of these nations.

http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2011/11/23/iea-review-shows-many-developing-countries-subsidize-fossil-fuel-consumption-creating-artificially-lower-prices/
hrdharry
|
January 04, 2012
So we can expectt mr Newton at greedy valley to make a living wage of what? 100 million a year. Man thats a bunch of doo doo.
oldskool
|
January 04, 2012
One word: DUH!

You must be kidding. A person doesn't need a BS to figure this out. If Iran felt so inclined, we would be paying $6.00 per gallon, maybe more. Increased instability in the middle east will hurt us even more. The adminastration needs to get tough and send the fifth fleet to cruise the straights to walk the talk.
1TarBaby
|
January 04, 2012
snow_ball 2 Hours Ago

If I was dictator for 8 years I would: ....

The fact you would do something is your not director.

10 years ago there was talk of drilling for gas around Nenana. Gas was discovered and nothing was done.

The Gov could order the price crude oil going into the Refineries CUT by waving a pen; he could order the Healy Coal plant fired up.

In fact if the Legislature could find a single testicle do the same things including starting construction on Susitna Dam.

The problem is 100% political and Jello-O back bones.

Now is the time to figure out who gets fired next November. Anyone who has been down there more then 1 term needs to be gone.

snow_ball
|
January 04, 2012
1TarBaby: "10 years ago there was talk of drilling for gas around Nenana..."

- Wasn't that done last year by Doyon on Native lands? Perhaps they could they claim sovereign nation status and do whatever they please.

"The Gov could...order the Healy Coal plant fired up."

- I'm not certain all that is holding this up, but I suspect it's way beyond the Gov. If he acted like a dictator and told them to go ahead and start it up he would eventually have Federal agents arresting him for blowing off the restraining hand of EPA and others. This is why I said "if I could be dictator for 8 years." Dictators do as they please because they have police forces and control of the media. Like Obama.

My comment was merely an exercise in dreaming what great things could be accomplished to restore true freedom and viability to our state if a dictator could chain all of the environmentalists to a big tree and get them out of the way of progress. Imagine the jobs and stability.
1TarBaby
|
January 04, 2012
It is all political.

Very poor understating of cause and effect of OPEC's price manipulation by controlling supply for example.

The Gov. has the power to tell the EPA NO, just like Gov. Hickel told them NO more MBTE (sp?) because it was making us sick.

You may have noticed, NO ONE [meaning DNM editor, local politicos, talk show hosts etc] says much about cutting the price of crude going into the refineries.

Have you ask yourself, why?

Also, have you wondered why the UAF types never seem to mention the relationship between a commodity's wholesale price and retail price?

childofsol
|
January 04, 2012
Tarbaby

How much spare production capacity do the OPEC nations have?
1TarBaby
|
January 05, 2012
childofsol 9 Hours Ago Tarbaby How much spare production capacity do the OPEC nations have?

What ever it takes to run the price up or down.

The sale of oil on the speculative spot market sets the pump price. Remember, most oil is sold via "contracts" to protect the seller and buyer from price fluctuations that show up in the spot market.

Google OPEC price increases

When Gulf War round 1 started (to kick Saddam out of Kuwait) the price of gasoline in Fairbanks went up 50 Cents the NEXT DAY!

Watch the price go up and down driven by world events and speculative manipulation.

FairbanksOptimist
|
January 04, 2012
I wonder if T. Boone Pickens is feeling a bit naive about his endorsement of Obama? Seems like Obama hasn't done much regarding the Pickens Plan. I realize he's been very busy throwing money at his green energy buddies/campaign fundraisers.
childofsol
|
January 04, 2012
The EPA, DOT and HUD have been working together to foster the development of custainable communities. Here is a link to a document describing smart growth strategies that communities can adopt. Other than the 'smart growth' title (which carries the baggage of previous misguided urban renewable policies), this document does a good job of outlining best practices for urban renewal, which has economic and lifestyle benefits completely separate peak oil considerations.

'Essential Smart Growth Fixes For Urban and Suburban Zoning Codes'

http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/pdf/2009_essential

_fixes.pdf

One of the biggest obstacles to implementation is the continued funneling of money away from urban areas and into new development. The grant money available to communites for these types of programs, for example, is a drop in the bucket compared to that spent on highway infrastructure.
5smoothstones
|
January 05, 2012
Mobility is important, how can you oppose freedom of travel? Don’t we live in the Last Frontier because we choose not to live in a planned metropolis? Let’s see- reduce greenhouse gas emissions, concerned about climategate change mitigation, foster mixed use high density housing, preserve open space, urban growth boundaries etc... Re-zone, change the comp plan! Same playbook as Sustainable America a New Consensus, The Presidents Council on Sustainable Development, UNEP’s Habitat I, The Brundtland Report. Part and parcel to the vision Fairbanks plan. Same philosophy, goals, themes. And this isn’t an Agenda? Being familiar with the EPA report are you not aware of it’s origins? Not one word of respecting private property rights and land owners use decisions. In fact quite the opposite. Utopia provided by bureaucrats, absconded from landowners. No thanks. I’ll conserve fuel and power use and live within my means and encourage others to do the same.
5smoothstones
|
January 05, 2012
Some factual history.

The United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (HABITAT 1) was held in Vancouver, British Columbia in 1976. This conference established the United Nations policy on

private property rights and produced a document that became the blueprint for comprehensive land use planning.

The preamble to the report declared that: “Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals... Public control of land use is therefore indispensable....”

Recommendation D.2

(c) Such control may be exercised through:

(i) Zoning and land-use planning as a basic instrument of land policy in general and of control of land-use changes in particular;

Sounds just like the Borough Planning Department in 2012!

childofsol
|
January 05, 2012
The smart growth best practices document that I was referencing is a guide. The grants available from these agencies don't involve coersion; the fact that the communities must apply for a grant to receive one sorta indicates this, wouldn't you say?

The freedom to travel anywhere you want to is/was a temporary phenomenon, brought to you by cheap fossil fuels. Now that 'freedom' has become an illusion at best, and a nightmare for many as they struggle to make ends meet.

By the way, the so-called freedom to sprawl comes at the expense of urban residents' freedom to have quality infrastructure. I agree that people should be able to live where they want. But that doesn't mean that their lifestyles should be as heavily subsidized as they are. A lot of smart people have been aware for some time that it was a mistake to pour trillions into building an oil-dependent society. Scapegoating environmentalists or OPEC will become increasingly difficult.
snow_ball
|
January 04, 2012
If I was dictator for 8 years I would:

1. Make the Susitna dam project a top state priority. Get it out there for bid and awarded within 4 years. If the environmentalists try to stop it IGNORE them just the same way Obama ignored the investigations into “fast and furious”, his ACTUAL birth place, Pelosi’s misuse of government funds, and countless other scandals surrounding his presidency.

2. Let a portion of ANWR be opened for drilling and development this summer. Limit the impacted area to retain most of its pristine appearance, without locking the entire region up. If the environmentalists try to stop it IGNORE them just the same way Obama…

3. Get the Healy clean coal plant running this year. If the enviros try to stop it...

4. Start design/construction of a NG line to Fbks(while also trucking it in the meanwhile) as phase 1 of a continuation line. And if the enviros try to stop it…

5. With the state revenue coming in from taxing gas & oil apportion 10% to renewable engy
Samm_redux
|
January 04, 2012
Snow_ball... if you accomplished those five things in 8 years, I would be willing to let you stay on as dictator on a year by year basis to see what other great things you might accomplish. ;-)
1BullMoose
|
January 04, 2012
Re price having to do with supply.

Price has nothing to do with the amount of oil at the North Pole refinery there is no shortage!

Oil's wholesale price it tied to the spot market price which speculation driven.

Historically we have been allowing the price to be set by "speculation" rather the actual cost.

------

As for the Prof's comments, he is preaching the environmentalist line OR flat lying or/and profoundly miss informed about production and OPEC's price rigging.

His paycheck comes from royalty oil sales and political influence to obtain UAF funding.
1BullMoose
|
January 04, 2012
The single factor running up the cost of "oil" and electricity is the state of Alaska's monopoly pricing of your royalty crude to make a profit of 20 times cost while filling the state treasury.

Now, for the stupid question.

How does conservation reduce the price the monopoly's crude going into the refinery?

How, does conservation reduce the price of your electric bill when GVEA ups the price to make up 4 lost sales?

Am I correct?

World oil consumption is about 80 million barrels per day, sold on contract, however your state sells your property to the refineries' at the oil speculation pierced "spot" market.

And is this correct?

The spot market is based on the quick sale price of about 2 million barrels not covered by contract sales.

Your problem is political and the result of Ak gouging and your voting history.

FYI

If lead starts flying in the Persian Gulf look for the spot market price to hit $200/barrel and AK State to rip you off.

childofsol
|
January 04, 2012
Equating domestic production with energy indenpendence is missing the boat. Absent economic collapse, the price that US citizens pay for gasoline, heating oil, food, etc. will continue to rise regardless of where the oil comes from. As the professor stated, this is because demand will continue to rise faster than supply, and because new supplies of oil are more expensive to extract and process than oil from conventional wells.

We are using less. Some of this is due to voluntary lifestyle changes. I think that a lot more of the reduction is due to recession. There is only so much than in individual family can do to decrease their oil dependence. We need to work together on this looming disaster. But if Obama says anything like "peak oil" or "end to growth" before the election, I'll eat my boots.
childofsol
|
January 04, 2012
If anyone is interested, here is the article:



'U.S. on Pace to Become Net Fuel Exporter Despite High Gasoline Prices at Home'

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/12/05/us-on-pace-to-become-net-fuel-exporter/

The article talks exclusively about increasing fuel exports, and doesn't mention that about 48% of all the oil that we use is imported. It's a HUGE amount. The only way we could possibly be on the path to 'energy independence' is by proactively cutting demand much more than we have, or through demand destruction (recession).

The last parargraph of the article: "The last time the U.S. exported more oil than it imported, in 1949, the country was still ramping up its economy after World War II. It became increasingly dependent on foreign oil, especially in the 1960s and 1970s."

Like I said, the reporter is either not worthy of the title, or the news organization and others are misleading the public.

LadyNYC
|
January 04, 2012
COS, I don't think that article was misleading at all. A number of different newspapers and agencies reported the same thing - that the US is exporting record quantities of fuel. Yes, we're still nowhere near energy independence, and are still importing huge quantities of *crude* oil. Our refineries convert crude into fuel. Americans are cutting back, and are using more fuel-efficient vehicles, and the net result is that we're consuming less *fuel.* The refineries are then exporting the surplus, what Americans don't use. The impact of this is that Americans are now competing on the same market as Europe, Asia, etc. People in these countries will pay significantly more for fuel, so it makes a lot of economic sense for our refineries to sell to them. The downside is, because of this, we'll be forced to spend even more money for a gallon of fuel, which will further drive down our consumption, further increase exports, further increase fuel costs. The vicious cycle continues.
childofsol
|
January 04, 2012
Exactly right, Professor Reynolds.

We've got a rocky road (cliff?) of energy descent ahead of us, if the comments in the Newsminer are any indication of public awareness.

In the article about electricity prices, someone quoted Fox News as saying we're exporting more petroleum products than we import, so high prices must be a conspiracy. That article was very misleading, or perhaps the reporter isn't worthy of the title. We're a net importer of petroleum, despite how much finished product we export. We do have the capacity to be energy-independent (we'll get there eventually, although it would appear not without a lot of kicking and screaming), but the most important step will be to become informed.
snow_ball
|
January 04, 2012
Sorry, I misspelled hypocrite.

Hypocrite: "one who feigns beliefs, feelings, or vitues that one does not hold or possess; insincerity." - The American Heritage Dictionary

Before any radical environmentalist opens his/her mouth and attempts to stop developing new oil sources, he/she ought to live a life without oil so they see what their policies are doing to the rest of us.

Walk the walk before you talk the talk.
RJ11
|
January 04, 2012
snow_ball

Well said the left has always wanted it both ways - low prices and no developemnt. Then you have people like our former speaker of the house (Nancy P), former vice president (inventor of the internet), and current president that speak down to hard working Americans about using less resources yet they live like the rich and famous.

Occupy that.
snow_ball
|
January 04, 2012
We need to drill ANWR.

Enough of being held hostage by radical environmentalists.

Everyone who opposes drilling in ANWR should park their cars, stop using fuel oil to heat their homes, and stop using the airlines, otherwise they are hypocrits.
childofsol
|
January 04, 2012
How will extracting oil from ANWR keep the price of gasoline from rising? Keep in mind that (1)ANWR oil would be traded on the world market; and (2) ANWR production would be a small fraction of world oil production.

There one and only one rational way that we could drill in ANWR: require any drilling legislation to be coupled with a massive national energy descent plan to be phased in over a period of ten years, but starting immediately. Keep in mind that we would be taking the wild out of the wildest place in the US - never mind potential for ecosystem harm - so the benefits would need to be substantial to make it worth doing.

If we drill without such a plan, we're sunk. More business as usual, meaning LESS investment in energy descent, and more of a valuable resource going out the tailpipe. (Think back to Prudhoe, or the shale gas 'revolution': how did THAT energy indepence work out for us?)

snow_ball
|
January 04, 2012
childofsol: " How will extracting oil from ANWR keep the price of gasoline from rising?"

I did not imply that it would. My point is in any economy that intends to remain viable into the future, it needs to look 10 years down the road and be proactive in developing its resources. It is a sign of foolish shortsighted leaders to wait until crisis hits and then react, in lieu of looking down the road and saying "in order to have what we need THEN, we need to do such and such TODAY". Once oil hits $200/brl because of a lack of spooled-up supply, it will already be too late to head off disaster because we inadequately developed fields and wells 10 years prior.

Those who want to lock up ANWR are being unreasonable because here we have abundant resources that can be extracted from a small fraction of the actual area sightseers will see, yet they want it 100% pristine. There must always be a tradeoff between scenary and development in order to keep a nation viable.
Newsminer.com encourages a lively exchange of ideas regarding topics in the news. Users are solely responsible for the content. Comments are not pre-approved by News-Miner staff. Please keep it clean, respect others and use the 'report abuse' link when necessary. Read our full user's agreement.