View Full Version : Oil $100 per barrel in sight.

Easy Glider
20th Apr 2006, 20:06
With record oil prices reached yesterday, $74 brent crude and $72 on the New York exchange, the outlook is less than rosey for the worlds airlines. Virgin and B.A now both add fuel surcharges of £70 per person per return flight.

Economists warn that $100 a barrel will almost certainly materialise by the peak summer season. One has to wonder at what oil price certain airlines will be forced out of business ???

20th Apr 2006, 20:12
I've heard Southwest is really adverse to raising fare prices because even a small difference in price would result in a big difference in booking.

For me, it would seem that a "fuel charge" wouldn't deter very many people, but that's just me.

20th Apr 2006, 20:28
Bully boy George W.....blustering to the Iranians, rather than letting the back channel diplomats do the work:hmm:.
A nice little earner for the share-holders of oil companies:E

20th Apr 2006, 20:47
Oil prices can't rise too high for too long as this increases pressure to develop other energy sources for automotive, etc... Hence hopefully this will not be a long term development if it does hit $100 /barrel.

Amen, 757manipulator.

Easy Glider
20th Apr 2006, 21:01
I seem to remember that being said when oil reached $50 a barrel !!!

20th Apr 2006, 21:06
Once the brakes go on the price will fall!! It's known as market forces. :hmm:

20th Apr 2006, 21:22
George W. Bush could arrest the price increase and start the price falling tomorrow with one simple speech. All he has to announce is:

A program to reduce America's oil consumption by ten percent before the end of his Presidency, and a longer term progran to break Americas oil addiction and make it "oil independent" by 2020.

Elements of the program would include:

* A fifty cent a gallon Federal Tax on Gas, the money to used to reduce the Federal deficit.

* Removal of tax breaks for SUV's and large vehicles, replacing them with tax breaks for smaller vehicles.

* Requiring all Federal Agencies to reduce their oil consumption, including the military. Effective immediately,all new Federal Vehicles to be four cylinder cars unless there are compelling reasons otherwise.

* Tax breaks for alternative energy sources, including nuclear power stations, but not coal fired plants.

Watch the speculators get burned.

20th Apr 2006, 21:26
Don't kid yourselves, and forget the anti-Bush bla bla. Invest in oil-based energy funds/stocks, and balance the risk of being flight-deck, what with the prices of fares zooming up. (Pilot myself, not a financial advisor)

Ignition Override
21st Apr 2006, 06:23
757Manipulator and Sunfish: :ok:
Most of the GOPs policies are leading to the end of decent careers for US pilots. In addition to that, when foreign entities are allowed to exert much more control over airlines, they can "cherry pick" which labor laws to follow. There is pressure in Congress to allow foreign groups to have more influence.

Implications for safety? Read up on certain overseas operations, especially B-737 etc flighthour limits a few years ago in Red China...woops, excuse me...the PRC, our cherished trading 'partner'.

This country was first shafted by OPEC in 1973, and again later. We did not learn much, or want to. Now we allow Exxon and others to fair quite well, thank you.

What tax breaks do European/British airlines enjoy which compensates for very high fuel? Or are there fuel subsidies, maybe steep discounts below market rates? :hmm:

low n' slow
21st Apr 2006, 08:05
Am I getting this?
Its not about the fact that we don't have enough oil. There's oil for another 50 years consumption at our rate. We know this, and this has been so ever since we started using oil. There's simply no point in projecting more oil-sites than we can afford to consume in the next 50 years. Therefore it allways seems as though the oil is running out.

Yes, I know it WILL run out eventually and we might as well work towards greener and renewable energy-sources. The world would be a better place if we stopped using fossil fuels etc. etc. This should however not force the oil to increase in price. What we're seeing now is some kind of panic to fool people that the oil price needs to be this high. It doesn't. It's a cheap trick (rather expensive for some).


21st Apr 2006, 08:53
There is plenty of oil about, but there is a maximum rate at whitch we can extract it. Currently we are off the approx 82mbpd limit by about 500kbpd and China and India are increasing their demand rapidly.

21st Apr 2006, 09:16
There is plenty of oil about, but there is a maximum rate at whitch we can extract it. Currently we are off the approx 82mbpd limit by about 500kbpd and China and India are increasing their demand rapidly.

Not the limiting factor actually....it's the refining capacity that is the problem.

With regard to pricing I bought Marine Gas Oil futures yesterday which mature March 2007 for USD 642 per mtonne. This against a spot of USD 609 per mtonne so the market ain't looking at anything like a $100 per barrel price and trust me these boys are sharp.

Robert Vesco
21st Apr 2006, 10:43
The biggest factor in high oil prices is psychological: FEAR!

Price/barrel has more than doubled in the last 3 years, but has demand doubled as well? Have oil reserves suddenly halved? Of course not!

A couple of reasons IMHO why oil is so expensive now:

1) that stupid and wreckless morron in the White House
2) lack of refinery capacity
3) all that politically correct bullsh!t about "the greenhouse effect" from the former communists, who suddenly turned out to be ´environmentalist´ after the Berlin wall came down. (remember the "acid rain" from the 80´s?)

:zzz: :zzz: :zzz:

21st Apr 2006, 11:01
The drop in oil prices in concert with all other commodities yesterday showed that the oil price is partly driven by speculation. There is no actual reason to have such high oil prices.
In the long run thou this might be different...

21st Apr 2006, 11:24
The drop in oil prices in concert with all other commodities yesterday showed that the oil price is partly driven by speculation. There is no actual reason to have such high oil prices.
In the long run thou this might be different...

Hits nail on head...

21st Apr 2006, 11:55
Has anyone else read "Half gone" by Jeremy Leggett?

Really good read and published in 2005. He used to be a geologist for the big oil companies. Everything he said would happen is fast happening before my very eyes. I'm not really smart enough to precis it here but the title gives it away.

It's not that we have run out of oil. It's all about the race for it after it's "half gone".

That's when the poop hits the fan and the price rockets up. OPEC divides out the profits based on a countries claimed (and unproven) oil reserves. The more you claim to have the more you get to pump and the more you earn. So we have reached the half gone point (as the price indicates, and independant experts agree) and no one want's to believe it, and everyone is pretending they have billions of barrels of easily pumped oil so they can get a bigger share of the pie. The suppliers don't want the price to go too high because alternate technology will step in. But they aren't building too many new refineries either. A bit fishy that, don't you think?

I'm a pilot with an SUV and a love of motorbikes so I'm not just a tree hugger. But invading Iraq under false pretences, an oil man in the white house. I think oil will never be cheap again.

21st Apr 2006, 13:41
The reason we have prices so high is because the Iraq war has been a failure.

A the end of 2003, the market forecasters predicted oil from Iraq would be available to trade on the Western market, because Sadam would be gone and sanctions lifted. It has not happened but that doesn't mean the reserves will evaportae.

This high price is a short term-phenomena and the most significant causes are:

Gulf of Mexico; Hurrican Katrina last year: Massive delays in major projects and major damage to existing infrastrucutre resulting in lower than forecast output from the region.
Iraq: See above
West Africa: Increased tension and hostilities resulting in platforms 'shutting in' to protect workers from militant groups with restricted output.

The equilibrium will return.

Meantime it wouldn't be a bad thing though if we all made even a few minor adjustmenst to our lifestyles and behaviours. Scudsy - sell the SUV. They are utterly ostentatious.

Buster Hyman
21st Apr 2006, 15:44
When the alternative energy sources came up in the 70's & 80's, wasn't it the oil companies that paid big $$$ for the patents? The orbital engine is one that springs to mind.

Thunderbird 3
21st Apr 2006, 15:44
The increased fuel price surcharge may not effect the casual passenger.
But is effecting the cargo fraternity, regular shippers of air cargo are now looking very closely at ocean freight costs and transit times.
If these people pull their cargo from air to sea, carriers will receive a sharp
decrease in revenue.

21st Apr 2006, 19:45
The price of oil is high when people want to use 1% more than is available and so there is a shortage until demand is reduced or more oil processed. We are exceeding production by a small amount but people will pay $74 a barrel instead of using less in the short term. What should happen in a normal market is airlines should trim just a few unpopular flights per week and use 1-2% less fuel. Then supply is near demand and we get a stable price. What happens in the real world is that airlines do not make the small adjustment and go broke instead. How many airlines are profitable when oil is $74 a barrel. If they get a stromy year in the US it could be $100 soon.

21st Apr 2006, 20:51
Wonder who is earning big money on this hoop...:hmm:

Aand an airline would rather starve to death than raising it's ticket fares.
The first carriers that goes bankrupt, looses, and the others can raise
teir ticketprices again.

Orion Man
21st Apr 2006, 22:43
Thank George W in the main for the current crisis. The mess in Iraq and threats against Iran have propelled the oil price upwards. True, Nigeria and Chinese consumption are contributory but hey we all know markets hate uncertainty and conflict.


Orion Man

21st Apr 2006, 23:46
Who are the oil extraction companies? Who are the refining / marketing companies? How much of the price of crude goes to the country from whose soil it is pumped?

Of course one can't believe all one reads, but I saw a news report a few days ago about oil production in Chad and how much money the extraction companies paid Chad. It seemed to be about $2.50 a barrel.

Finding oil, digging wells and operating them is not free, but we seem to have a case where the extractors and largest refining / marketing companies are pretty close to being one and the same - and thus have some flexiibility at assigning costs.

There is a regional refining / marketing company near me. Their gas/petrol used to be the cheapest - now it is the most expensive. I'd suspect that they buy crude on the spot market. Spot market or near-term delivery contracts are what we read about. The big boys must have longer-term agreements, something like Southwest Airlines' hedging contracts which assure them fuel at hardly more than half today's spot price. Why would oil companies enter into such contracts? Surely they intended to make a profit at that price.

My cousin used to be a scientist solving refining problems for the sugar industry. Some years ago there was a huge spike in the price of sugar. His comment was that "Nobody buys sugar at those prices". The big users all had long-term contracts at much lower, stable prices. They weren't much affected by the spot prices that made newspaper headlines.

Puzzled near Rockville

21st Apr 2006, 23:49
Yup, an asteroid is going to hit earth, its President Bush's fault.

Fact one. Extreme limited oil refinery capacity. Hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil are waiting to be refined. In the US most refineries have been forced down to 50% production for the winter/summer change over, thank the EPA.

Fact two. Increased demand in China and India, not Nigeria.

Fact three. Civil unrest in Nigeria.

Fact four. .................oh to heck with fact four.

Bottom line is what ever the causes (yes, causes) of the price oil going up the President of the United States has little effect, no matter who is president. With one exception, opening up the Federal Reserve Oil fields as Clinton did just before his second run for president.

22nd Apr 2006, 03:40
Fact - peak oil is closer than any politician would have you think. War was not declared in the ME just for laughs ya know.

Fact - high oil prices are providing a hedge against the spiraling US current account deficit. All efforts from Washington are directed at maintaining greenback dollar hegemony at any cost.

Fact - Iran is threatening US dollar hegemony in concert with Russia and China. He who controls the flow of energy to China controls the biggest looming military threat facing America. This is why America will make moves on Iran - a prelude to a bigger game, as always.

Opinion - The bigger game - America will push Taiwan to declare independence thus providing a context for showdown with China. Iran, having been bombed into the Stone Age, will be unable to meet China's energy needs during conflict. Summer Pulse 04 was just the beginning.

Opinion - most of what we argue about today - seniority, command upgrades, low cost carriers etc - will be totally irrelevant in the not to distant future.

22nd Apr 2006, 05:04
Just to pick on one of your wild statements, could you expand on how America's current account balance is aided by keeping the price of oil high?

Oil is by far America's largest import, and the resulting trade deficit does nothing for the dollar.

22nd Apr 2006, 06:58
:ugh: Here we go again.

Oil is not running out! It's not about supply and demand, it's about opportunistic profit taking! It's not about the supply of crude, it's about the currency that crude is traded in! Etc!

Maybe I should stand on a box.....:rolleyes:

22nd Apr 2006, 07:21
Policy prescriptions for dealing with external costs often start from an economic perspective. Economic theory holds that the price of a commodity such as oil should reflect its marginal cost to society, where costs include economic resources used to produce and deliver the commodity plus costs to environmental resources, human health, and energy security etc. which are termed external costs. External costs or externalities are defined as side effects of production or consumption activity that affect producers and consumers who are not part of the activity. Such costs are not considered by the generator, are not directly monetary, and may imply a misallocation of society's resources.
From a policy perspective, the ideal is to find a balance between the benefits of reduced harmful externalities and the costs of reducing the externality. In theory, the balance is found where incremental costs of avoidance are equal to the reduction in incremental external costs. At that point, damages to other activities have been internalized in the price of the externality-generating activity and additional expenditures to reduce remaining damages are not warranted on economic grounds.
Actually estimating external costs is fraught with conceptual as well as measurement problems, and estimating costs of avoidance can be equally contentious. The analytical community can offer approximations of the monetary value of various external costs, but such analyses often leave large areas for professional, public, and political disagreement.

Low Flier
22nd Apr 2006, 10:30
Fact one. Extreme limited oil refinery capacity. Hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil are waiting to be refined. In the US most refineries have been forced down to 50% production for the winter/summer change over, thank the EPA.
Fact four. .................oh to heck with fact four.

To heck with "fact" one too!

It shows a very poor understanding of the polarity of market forces if Con-pilot believes that excess crude sloshing around the spot market as a result of production bottlenecks in the creaky refinery system in the US is likely to cause the price of crude to go up instead of down.

As for the changeover from winter to summer spec gasoline production having a causal effect on this week's spike in crude prices, bollocks.

Take a look at the futures prices:
June 2006 $75.12
July 2006 $75.97
Aug 2006 $76.53
Sep 2006 $76.92
Oct 2006 $77.02
Nov 2006 $77.09

The price of oil has gone up because people believe that it will go up. It's that simple.

I don't know where the notion that crude will reach $100/bbl this year came from. Unless the cretin in the White House runs amok again and cannot be reined in by his grownups, the more sober projections suggest that the year end price is likely to be around $80.65 and the spikes are unlikely to be much more than $82-$83/bbl.

rupert the bear
22nd Apr 2006, 10:56
Rival airlines are expected to follow Air New Zealand's decision to raise fares, aviation experts predict.

An annual fuel bill that has doubled to $1 billion in the past two years has prompted Air New Zealand to increase all its fares by 10 per cent as of May 1.

"You can expect that many other airlines will now follow," said Macquarie Bank aviation analyst Paul Huxford. "This is not unexpected given the magnitude of the rise in the jet fuel price."

Qantas said on Monday that it was reviewing its fuel surcharges. British Airways has also said it will raise its surcharge on long-haul tickets sold in Australia and New Zealand.

Flight Centre general manager Jeremy van der Klundert said the rises "may create a domino effect".

Air New Zealand chief financial officer Rob McDonald said he regretted the move but the numbers were "stark".

The situation in Iran and Iraq and other issues such as conflict in Nigeria had caused oil prices to soar to record highs.

That, combined with a falling New Zealand dollar, made a significant rise unavoidable, he said.

The airline said it could not rule out further increases if jet fuel continued to soar.

"Until some of the geopolitical issues are resolved in a positive way it is difficult to get optimistic," Mr McDonald said.

Asked if prices might fall in future, he said: "The prices can come down again. But having said that, it will take a reasonably dramatic turnaround because we are not covering the full impact. But if the price comes down dramatically then the fares could come down."

The price for a barrel of the benchmark Singapore jet fuel was US$40 in April 2004 compared with US$89 a barrel today.

Fuel is now the airline's number one cost.

"The whole industry has got this issue so everyone is going to have to address it at a point in time," Mr McDonald said.

Qantas was not commenting on the move yesterday other than to reiterate that its prices were under review.

This is the second time Air New Zealand has raised its fares in the past 12 months.

Last August it raised its fuel surcharge on domestic fares which effectively lifted prices by 4.5 per cent.

Yesterday's announcement applies to domestic and international fares - although it is being applied to base fares only, not to the fuel surcharge. It is also being applied to the pre-GST price only. This means travellers will face a net increase of about 9 per cent on most tickets.

If the full impact of the fuel cost had been passed to travellers the rise could have been as much as 25 per cent, Mr McDonald said.

But the company was aware that passing on the cost would have a severe impact on demand.

"That is the challenge, but we can't do nothing."

Air New Zealand has already warned its profits for 2006 will be well down on the year before.

Travel agents described the rise as disappointing but inevitable.

It was "still hard to swallow", said Flight Centre's Mr van der Klundert.

One positive was the announcement that the fuel surcharge would be merged back into one single price by May 15, said House of Travel retail director Brent Thomas.

"That's good from a consumer's point of view and we'd like to see all the airlines do it."

He was optimistic the rise would not result in a major fall in the number of travellers.

The airfare was generally just one component of a big international holiday.

"So we may find people will go to Europe for 16 days instead of 17 days and that will be the price difference of the airfare."

He was also expecting a surge in business as people rushed to book before May 1.

It was important to remember that a ticket to Britain was still about the same price as it was 10 years ago, he said.

In relative terms that was significantly cheaper.

Plans by Air New Zealand to code-share with Qantas on the transtasman route were in no way related to the price rise, Mr McDonald said.

Gingerbread Man
22nd Apr 2006, 11:29
Increased demand in China and India

Well that's what happens if you're a greedy country and have a billion people each ;) . I don't know how they stand it - I get fed up enough with the number of people in the UK, and that's a comparitively small number.

Some oil saving tips:

1) If you have an automatic transmission, switch to N when you're not moving, and use the parking brake for christ's sake.

2) Don't buy a car with an automatic transmission.

3) Don't go on holiday to places just because it's sunny there. Rejoice in the weather you're given :* .

4) If you're a moron/ have had a lobotomy/ can't see further than 1 metre (delete as applicable), don't go out in your car. Stay at home and examine the backs of your hands instead. I do :8

Ginger :}

22nd Apr 2006, 11:45
Another thing is that spot markets (Comex NY and others) are not the only chanel of buying/selling oil. This is just "the market", where short demands are covered. Most of the oil goes through the oil producing countries and oil companies from well to pump with long term contracts.

Orion Man
22nd Apr 2006, 11:48

I was referring to the civil unrest in Nigeria not its consumption. My apologies for a badly worded sentence. The threat of conflict does drive the oil price up - fact. It did so before GW1, did so before GW2 and is doing so now Iran is being threatened. The perceived threat Chavez senses about US policy in South America is not helping either. Similarly Iraq oil supplies are still not back at their pre-invasion levels yet.

Asides the rise in demand in Asia, only a rose-tinted glassed-man can say the President of the USA has no effect on the price of oil.


Orion Man

22nd Apr 2006, 12:04
OMFG...$100 a barrel?

Bad enough for passengers. But what about the cost of my flying lessons?!

22nd Apr 2006, 13:15
Ginger, Not strictly true about automatics.

If you adapt your driving style to take advantage of the lack of engine braking where appropriate, you can achieve very comparable consumption figures.

Gingerbread Man
22nd Apr 2006, 13:53
Cheerfully withdrawn frostbite ;)

1972 I think we can all give up any idea of flying for a hobby if things continue as they are (unless one happens to win the lottery or present a show on BBC radio). I haven't flown since January simply because I can't afford it at the moment :( .

Ginger :ugh:

22nd Apr 2006, 14:02
Ginge, that's a real bummer. Keep buying those Lotto tickets mate.

Ever thought about selling your body on street corners? :}

22nd Apr 2006, 15:42
Ever thought about selling your body on street corners?

The plan is to MAKE money.

He's a sex object...............asks for sex and people object. :E :E :E

22nd Apr 2006, 18:33
Low Flier

The price of oil has gone up because people believe that it will go up. It's that simple.

I agree with the above statement 100%, however, that is not the only reason for the price increase of crude oil. In my humble (possibly misguided) opinion the following fears contribute to the increase much, much more than anyone in the White House.

Plain greed.

Fear of natural disasters, such as hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico resulting in the shutting off shore drilling platforms and causing major damage to the gulf coast refineries.

Civil unrest in Nigeria and Venezuela. (The US receives 6.8% from Nigeria and 7.5% from Venezuela of it oil imports. Canada is number 1 at nearly 11%.)

Unchecked increasing demand of oil and natural gas in China and India.

Increasing restrictions in the United States where oil and natural gas can be produced due to environmentally concerns. (Now this is one area that a President can affect the price of oil and natural gas.)

Terrorist attacks against major segments of the infrastructure of the oil/natural gas production and delivery system.

Now, as one can see from my profile, I live in one the major oil and natural gas producing states in the United States. We are finding new oil and gas fields constantly. The problem is we have to go deeper, a lot deeper to recover the oil and gas. In the neighborhood of 15,000 to 25,000 feet, down. A shallow well now is around 10,000 feet as compared to 1,000 to 1,500 feet in the recent past.

Do you have any idea how much it costs to drill down to 20,000 some odd feet, complete the well and join up to the distributing system (pipeline)?

$10,000,000.00 USD. That's right, over ten million US Dollars. That alone is a major factor in the price increase.

So, I feel that we agree on many points here, I just don't believe that a President can affect the price of oil and gas (with the exception of the environmental issue) as much as some people here seem to think they can.

22nd Apr 2006, 21:59
The Saudis are making record profits from this and yet they are letting their national flag airline go down the tubes.
Stating the old money shortage lie.
Who is fooling who here?

max autobrakes
24th Apr 2006, 07:29
Some interesting data coming out about synthetic fuel.
Don't laugh ,appx 70% of the fuel Hitler went to war with during WW2,was synthesised fuel, that is hydrogenated coal. The resultant fuel is in effect diesel.I believe Sideshow Bush just gave a multi-million dollar research grant to bring on line a pilot plant . In fact, I seem to recall , during the Apartheid years, thanks to sanctions ,the South Africans were synthesising/hydrogenating coal to make up the shortfall in their fuel imports ..
Surely with the elevated cost of crude these days, synthetic fuel will become a viable alternative.

24th Apr 2006, 08:39

I do not see how bottlenecks in refineries and restrictions re enviromental issues at refineries (unless it it to the actual extraction,) produces a rise in crude. There would actually be an excess of CRUDE that cannot be used and therefore the market will be driven down not up.

It is the expectation/perception/guess(/or 'the taxi driver told me he heard it from a Saudi' type thinking) that there will not be enough or a restricted supply of crude oil to refine that will drive the price up. Anyone who does not believe unrest in oil producing areas such as what is happening over Iran would be just the person to sell the Sydney Harbour Bridge to I reckon. (Con this was not aimed at you personally, after re-reading it and seeing where unintended offence may be taken)

Petrol and diesel etc prices would on the other hand be driven up by shortage of refining capacity.

Re driving Automatics

My automatic car is rated at 2l/100k lower fuel consumption than the equvilant car with manual. Mind you that is still 13l/100k (21 mpg for the antiquated part of the world) so hang my head in shame for destroying the enviroment, but I love the feel/sound of my 260kw V8 in full cry. Just not the fuel bill or tickets if/when I upset the 'boys in blue' just doing their job.:E :E

24th Apr 2006, 18:01
Petrol and diesel etc prices would on the other hand be driven up by shortage of refining capacity.

That is exactly my point about the shortage of refineries.

And no offence taken there Max.:ok:

25th Apr 2006, 10:47
This whole thread is typical! Get a bunch of non-oil traders and they all start speculating on things they know nothing about
- talk about Flightsim geeks, just cos they use fuel and some basic economic theory they think they know it all (and then try and post a comment to get some insight....)

Typical that they read an article then speculate on all sorts of things....

Sound familiar?

25th Apr 2006, 12:13
Typical that they read an article then speculate on all sorts of things....
Sound familiar?

Is that not what this site is about. Rumour and speculation, especially Jet Blast.

Not sure that you are likely to get head of the World bank or any 'reputable' source at all willing to release policy details or theory on here, just ordinary individuals that want to express an opinion. Whether others agree or disagree is irrelevant as I see it. Oportunity to debate, diversity of opinion and freedom to share it is what must of us believe is what is worth fighting for (unless you are one of the large part of the world starving then I guess a feed or survival become the basic point).

Nowhere have I seen it demanded you be a lawyer to comment on the law, police to comment on policing etc etc so why do you need to be an 'oil baron' to comment on what you believe could be the driving forces in the oil or any market for that matter.

As said many times before, you are not forced to read any thread so if mere plebs commenting on a subject offends you, don't read it :mad:

I will probably want to retract my rant tomorrow when I re-read it. In a shitty mood because my son has been 'king-hit' from behind tonight for very much the same reason. He expressed what I consider to be a very innocuose personal opinion on world events and someone did not have the guts, decency or whatever to dispute debate or disagree just a drunken punch from behind.

Get a friggen life and show some tolerance in this world :mad: :mad: :mad:

Capt. Queeg
25th Apr 2006, 12:36
Bully boy George W.....blustering to the Iranians, rather than letting the back channel diplomats do the work:hmm:.Are you serious???

I thought everyone knew better than to swallow this line that the Iranians might realise their little mistake and fall back into line.

Paris Dakar
25th Apr 2006, 12:39
I know this is JB and not 'Private Flying' but just to pick up on a point made by '1972'...................
OMFG...$100 a barrel?
Bad enough for passengers. But what about the cost of my flying lessons?!

At what cost will this current barrel price affect UK flying schools & clubs :{ :{ :{

25th Apr 2006, 13:05
Are you serious???
I thought everyone knew better than to swallow this line that the Iranians might realize their little mistake and fall back into line.
Yeah I am serious...the fact that George Gullible Bush is piling the pressure on Iran for his own domestic agenda (to deflect focus from Iraq, improve his domestic approval rating, and most cynically of all in my opinion, improve the profit margins for his Texas oil buddies) has very little to do with his administrations sense of "right and wrong". This whole process has its roots deeply embedded in the American psyche, particularly the religious right and conservatives due to failed US policies in the region going back to the 1920's and tracing there way through WW2, the Shah's regime, the Iraq/Iran conflict..and latterly the Iraq adventure. It has a lot less to do with Iran acquiring a nuclear capability..because if Iran even think about mis-behaving (in a nuclear sense) they will face Israel, Russia, Pakistan, India, China, Britain, and of course the US.
The best policy required here is firm diplomicy...there is very little the world powers can do short of razing the country to rubble. Gullible George is missing the point...and in this hes achieving nothing but the following....
Doha, Qatar - 24 April 2006
The President of the Conference of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) held informal consultations today with Oil and Energy Ministers of Member Countries attending the 10th International Energy Forum (IEF) in Doha, Qatar, 22-24 April 2006.
Ministers reflected on the oil market situation and observed, with satisfaction, that actions taken by the Organization in recent years have increased stability in the oil market, to the benefit of producers and consumers alike, whilst decisions taken by the OPEC Conference during the preceding eighteen months have clearly demonstrated OPEC’s success in overcoming supply disruptions by assuring adequate supplies to consumers. At the same time, however, the market remains volatile, with prices being driven more by geopolitical uncertainties and speculation than by supply/demand fundamentals, which clearly indicate that crude volumes entering the market are currently well in excess of actual demand, as levels of crude stocks in OECD countries demonstrate.
On this occasion, OPEC re-emphasized the Organization’s firm and proven commitment to providing adequate supplies of crude to consuming nations, as well as OPEC’s commitment to stabilizing the market and realizing its objective of maintaining crude oil prices at fair and equitable levels for the benefit of the world economy and the wellbeing of the market.

Even Opec are thinking about it.

25th Apr 2006, 14:52
I know this is JB and not 'Private Flying' but just to pick up on a point made by '1972'...................
At what cost will this current barrel price affect UK flying schools & clubs :{ :{ :{

Screw Blighty's flying schools. I'm only worried about the ones in WA. :eek:

J/K. Yup, we stop flying, they stop existing. Not good for anyone.

13th May 2006, 15:06
But at least we won't run out:

US ABC video (http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=1946708)

13th May 2006, 20:20
How much does it make in € ?