What is the Optimal Minimum Price for Petroleum?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Minimum Petroleum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of establishing a minimum price for petroleum to facilitate competition with alternative energy sources and to prevent market manipulation by foreign suppliers. Participants explore the implications of such a price floor, including its potential impact on oil production and environmental considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Vinod Khosla suggests that a minimum price for petroleum is necessary to allow alternatives to compete and to prevent foreign market manipulation.
  • Khosla references a past proposal for a tax to be implemented if oil prices fell below $40, indicating that current prices may warrant a higher floor.
  • One participant questions the political feasibility of implementing such a price floor, noting that it may be more acceptable in certain regions like the UK.
  • Another participant argues that a price floor would incentivize oil production in the US, particularly in challenging extraction locations, which require assurance of high prices for investment.
  • Concerns are raised about the perception of environmentalists being blamed for low production rates, while costs are cited as a significant factor in drilling decisions.
  • It is mentioned that a large portion of permitted drilling locations remain untouched, indicating a disconnect between permissions and actual production activity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and feasibility of a minimum price for petroleum. While some support the idea, others question its political viability and the motivations behind oil production decisions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the optimal price point and the broader implications of such a policy.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions regarding market dynamics, political willingness, and economic implications of setting a price floor. The discussion reflects uncertainties about the relationship between price, production, and environmental concerns.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,252
Reaction score
2,664
VINOD KHOSLA, co-founder, Sun Microsystems: I was recently at a conference where one of the senior executives of a major national oil company from Saudi Arabia, Aramco, came up to me and said, "Be careful." It was almost a warning. He said, "Be careful, because if biofuels are successful, we will drop the price of oil."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/environment/july-dec08/energytech_07-07.html

True or not, it is clear that any serious move away from our depedence on oil requires that the price of fuel be high. So, should a minimum price be set for petroleum so that, first, alternatives to petroleum can compete sooner than later, and next, so that foreign suppliers cannot manipulate the energy markets at will?

I tend to think so for this reason: Eventually, the price of fuel will be legitimately high enough to allow for competition, but artificial price fluctuations like those seen today, and in particular, the price drop that we will see, will hinder alternatives to petroleum until the need is dire and immediate. In the interest of national securiity and world peace, it is best to avoid that situation and act now.

But, even if we agree that a price floor is a good idea, what would be the right number?

PAUL SOLMAN: At the time we interviewed Khosla -- March 2006 -- oil was approaching $70 a barrel. He proposed a tax to kick in if oil fell below $40. Today those numbers seem ridiculously cheap, a price floor even at $70 politically feasible as never before.

The price of crude hovered around $20 barrel for about twenty years - since the shortages of the seventies - and it hit a low of $10 in early 2000. So we have seen a 1400% increase in eight years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
To set the price floor, you would have to do so with taxes, as your quote says, as the saudis or whoever can sell it at whatever price they want.

This begs the question whether those in power are willing to do that. The idea is very good, but I can't be sure whether it is deemed a good political move. I think it could very well happen in the UK given the sway of opinion. I'm surprised to think this as I usually err on the side of pessimism in these cases.
 
It would also encourage oil production in the US. A lot of the remaining fields in the US are very deep or in difficult to get to locations in the Outer Continental Shelf. This is expensive oil and companies are reluctant to invest in drilling in these expense locations without a guarantee that the price will remain high.
 
wildman said:
It would also encourage oil production in the US. A lot of the remaining fields in the US are very deep or in difficult to get to locations in the Outer Continental Shelf. This is expensive oil and companies are reluctant to invest in drilling in these expense locations without a guarantee that the price will remain high.

That's true. Environmentalists are often blamed when in fact the reason that we haven't pumped many wells, is cost.

I heard recently that that oil companies have not drilled on 80% of the land and ocean for which they already have permission to drill.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 133 ·
5
Replies
133
Views
28K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 83 ·
3
Replies
83
Views
10K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
12K
Replies
6
Views
5K