Panicking finance ministers. Squabbling OPEC. Slumping stock markets. Cancelled oil projects. Speculators rushing out of energy investments.
Here we sit, inundated with gloomy but indecipherable news on the economy and energy. Perched on the cliff of a slumping global economy, the price of oil slipping down from obscene $100+ levels, the media offers massively contradictory explanations.
Do we have too much oil or too little? Is cheaper oil good or bad for the economy? Will U.S. oil production leave us a major exporter or will North American drilling rigs shut down as oil prices fall? Is Saudi Arabia’s preference for expensive oil prevailing or is it Iran in the driver’s seat seeking exorbitantly costly crude?
The solution—and the only solution—is to break oil’s monopoly. Replacing it as a transportation fuel faster than the global economy grows, with efficient vehicles, electrification, biofuels and road to rail enables rapid growth accompanied by steadily lower oil (and fuel) costs.
We should remember we’ve been here, more scarily, before. The collapse of soaring oil prices signaled the beginning of the 2008 Great Recession. This milder repeat performance is not so confusing if we look at the basics—and remember that what counts about oil is not where it is produced, or exactly how much we need, but its price.
Ten things to remember about the price of oil
1. The price for all 93 mbd (million barrels of oil a day) the world consumes are set by the cost of producing the final, most expensive marginal barrels—currently from tar sands and deep ocean drilling. That price has fallen from $110 to $90 in the last year. It’s still sky-high--triple what it was a decade ago
2. Most global oil costs much, much less than $90 to pump. Half, mostly in Russia and OPEC, cost $40 or less. Another third, conventional oil around the world and shale oil in the U.S., costs $65 or less. Only the final 10 percent requires $75 and up.
3. This gap—high consumer prices for mostly low cost oil—transfers enormous wealth from the U.S., China and Europe to the governments of Russia and OPEC. These “petroleum rents” equal 3 percent of global GDP—$2.2 trillion. They drag down the world economy as much as shutting down Great Britain. (China spends most of its huge trade surplus with the US importing oil. That’s a big reason its growth has slowed.)
4. Oil is a little cheaper because
- U.S. shale oil at $65/bbl (barrel) is reducing the need for $110 tar sands and deep ocean crude. (3.6 mbd)
- U.S. fuel efficiency improvements (less than $40 bbl) replaced another 3.4 mbd of oil.
- Weak economies in Europe reduce demand for oil by a final 0.2 mbd.
5. Oil is still very expensive ($90) because
- Politics and violence keep about 3 mbd of low cost OPEC oil off the market.
- Emerging markets are still using more oil every year. (1.3 mbd)
- Most of the new oil found by Exxon, etc.—in Canada, the Caspian, the Arctic and off-shore—costs more than $90/barrel. High cost crude, even lots of it, doesn’t come to market as cheap gasoline.
6. In 2013 U.S. consumers spent more on gasoline and other petroleum products than ever before—even as U.S. oil production grew substantially. High price trumps lower volume.
7. A global slow down—or worse recession—will temporarily drive oil prices down. That stalls investment in high priced projects in tar sands, Arctic and ultra-deep oceans.
8. But when growth resumes—without equivalent investment in clean transport—crude oil will spike again. Industry will resume investing in expensive new exploration. But once again the growing oil tax on consumers will crush prosperity. Oil prices increase whenever the global economy grows faster than alternatives replace petroleum.
9. Worse, oil companies are not financing the search for new but unaffordable oil fields from their profits—they use those use to pump up their stock. (83 percent in the case of Exxon). Instead, they are borrowing from banks and other investors, putting the entire world economy at risk from an overleveraged oil and gas sector.
10. The core dilemma is that there is a surplus of $100 oil, but consumers cannot afford it. Prosperity requires $60-70 fuel. There is a lot of oil in that price range—but not quite enough to sustain global growth. The world economy is caught in a “volatility trap” between insufficient if affordable conventional oil and abundant but unaffordable extreme crude
The solution—and the only solution—is to break oil’s monopoly. Replacing it as a transportation fuel faster than the global economy grows, with efficient vehicles, electrification, biofuels and road to rail enables rapid growth accompanied by steadily lower oil (and fuel) costs. Our need for expensive crude will fade away. (Remember how much long distance telephone calls cost when Ma Bell had a monopoly. Oil’s transportation monopoly works the same way. We can have cheap transportation—only if oil faces competition).
The terrific news is that substitutes for oil cost less, less than last year’s $110, but also less than the new $90 benchmark. Goldman Sachs estimates that methanol, CNG either fossil or bio-sourced and electric cars are all cheaper than gasoline or diesel powered cars to buy and operate:
So the bottom line is that global energy consumers and their governments face a major choice: they can allow oil to retain its monopoly as a transportation energy source, even though cleaner options like electricity or rail are cheaper. We’ve tried that since oil prices began to rise in 2003, and we know where it leads. Global economic growth drives up oil prices, but provides no alternatives. Importing economies are drained of hundreds of billions of dollars. Eventually oil prices stall economic growth. The cycle begins again.
Or we can do for transportation what we did for telecommunications. Break the monopoly, invest in innovation—and as it happens, start moving beyond the fossil fuel that now looms as the biggest threat to climate security—oil. Cheap fuel will be good for the climate.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
- 29 Wildfires Blaze Across the West, Fueled by Drought and Wind ... ›
- Large Wildfires Scorch Forests in Drought-Stricken Southwest ... ›
Accessibility to quality health care has dropped for millions of Americans who lost their health insurance due to unemployment. mixetto / E+ / Getty Images
Accessibility to quality health care has dropped for millions of Americans who lost their health insurance due to unemployment. New research has found that 5.4 million Americans were dropped from their insurance between February and May of this year. In that three-month stretch more Americans lost their coverage than have lost coverage in any entire year, according to The New York Times.
- Trump Plans to End Federal Funding for COVID-19 Testing Sites ... ›
- 'Unfathomable Cruelty': Trump Admin Asks Supreme Court to ... ›
On hot days in New York City, residents swelter when they're outside and in their homes. The heat is not just uncomfortable. It can be fatal.
- Extreme Heat-Stressed Locations Could Increase by 80% - EcoWatch ›
- African Americans Are Disproportionately Exposed to Extreme Heat ... ›
- Extreme Heat Is Killing Americans While Government Neglect ... ›
Fracking companies are going bankrupt at a rapid pace, often with taxpayer-funded bonuses for executives, leaving harm for communities, taxpayers, and workers, the New York Time reports.
- Plunging Oil Prices Trigger Economic Downturn in Fracking Boom ... ›
- Fracking Boom Bursts in Face of Low Oil Prices - EcoWatch ›
- As Fracking Companies Face Bankruptcy, U.S. Regulators Enable ... ›
A report scheduled for release later Tuesday by Congress' non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) finds that the Trump administration undervalues the costs of the climate crisis in order to push deregulation and rollbacks of environmental protections, according to The New York Times.
- Under Trump, EPA Workers Seek Bill of Rights to Allow Them to ... ›
- Trump Adds 'Tasteless Insult to Injury' by Pushing Fossil Fuel ... ›
By Kristen Fischer
It's going to be back-to-school time soon, but will children go into the classrooms?
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) thinks so, but only as long as safety measures are in place.
Keeping Schools Safe<p>What will safer schools look like?</p><p>In a <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766822" target="_blank">JAMA article</a> published last month, <a href="https://www.jhsph.edu/faculty/directory/profile/1781/joshua-m-sharfstein" target="_blank">Dr. Joshua Sharfstein</a>, a pediatrician and professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, outlined suggestions — many of which are similar to AAP's.</p><p>Remote learning protocols must stay in place, especially as some schools stagger home and in-building learning. If another shutdown needs to occur, children will rely on distance learning completely, so it must be easy to switch to, he said.</p><p>He suggested giving parents a daily checklist to document their child's health. Kids should be screened quickly on arrival and be given hygiene supplies. Maintenance staff should use appropriate PPE and have regular cleaning schedules. A notification system should be in place if a case is identified, Sharfstein recommended.</p><p><a href="https://www.albany.edu/rockefeller/faculty/erika-martin" target="_blank">Erika Martin</a>, PhD, an associate professor of public administration and policy at University at Albany, said nutrition assistance and health services should be included. She called for tutoring programs with virtual options as well as technology access.</p>
Supporting Staff<p>Teachers and staff will be affected by safeguarding measures, noted <a href="https://directory.sph.umn.edu/bio/sph-a-z/rachel-widome" target="_blank">Rachel Widome</a>, PhD, an associate professor of epidemiology and community health at University of Minnesota.</p><p>"In order for all of the in-school precautions to work well, we'll be asking a lot of teachers and staff," Widome told Healthline. In addition to their usual workload, they'll now be asked to monitor mask-wearing, ensure children are keeping distance, and be aware of any symptoms.</p><p>Along with Sharfstein, Widome called for an increase in financial support. More employees will likely be required so teachers and staff members can keep up with the added demands.</p>
Should Kids Go Back?<p>While these guidelines may help get some schools to reopen, many people don't think children should go back to school over fears they could contract the disease and spread it to other vulnerable family members like grandparents, infant siblings, or their parents.</p><p>In a <a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2020/07/08/peds.2020-004879" target="_blank">Pediatrics</a> commentary, <a href="https://www.md.com/doctor/william-raszka-md" target="_blank">Dr. William V. Raszka, Jr.</a>, an infectious disease specialist at The University of Vermont Medical Center, argued that schools should open because school-aged children are far less important drivers of COVID-19 than adults.</p><p>But he says the risk and benefit is not equal among all students ages 5 to 18.</p><p>"Elementary schools are arguably higher priority for face-to-face schooling, since younger children are at lower risk for infection and transmission, and since parental supervision of younger children's distance learning may be particularly challenging," added Sorensen, who penned a <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/channels/health-forum/fullarticle/2767411" target="_blank">June article in JAMA</a> with reopening tips. "That means middle and high schools are more likely to emphasize distance learning."</p><p>Specific student populations, such as special education students and students with disabilities, would also benefit greatly from more time spent in face-to-face environments, Sorensen said.</p>
What Parents Can Do<p>Parents should ask for and receive frequent updates from schools about plans for the fall. They should also be informed about plans if and when COVID infections are identified, Sharfstein said.</p><p>"I'd like to see parents investing now, during the summer, in doing things that can slow and stop the spread of the virus in their communities," Widome said.</p><p>"Now is a good time for kids to practice wearing masks and get used to them as they may be wearing them for longer stretches if school starts up in person," Widome suggested.</p><p>She recommends parents try different mask designs and materials to see what children are more comfortable wearing.</p><p>"If you are using cloth face coverings, it's good to have extras on hand," Widome added.</p><p>Parents should model healthy behavior at home and while out in public — another thing that could affect how well children adapt to reopening practices, Sorensen said.</p><p>"Children may want to know more about face coverings," added <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/leescott/" target="_blank">Lee Scott</a>, chairwoman of the Educational Advisory Board at <a href="https://www.goddardschool.com/" target="_blank">The Goddard School</a>. "Dramatic play, such as creating or wearing a face covering, may help some children adjust to this concept." Schools can also show children photos of what faculty members look like in their masks so the students are familiar with that appearance.</p><p>Johns Hopkins University recently released its eSchool+ Initiative, a slew of resources surrounding education during the pandemic. These include a <a href="https://equityschoolplus.jhu.edu/reopening-checklist/" target="_blank">checklist for administrators</a>, report on <a href="https://equityschoolplus.jhu.edu/ethics-of-reopening/" target="_blank">ethical considerations</a>, and a tracker of <a href="https://equityschoolplus.jhu.edu/reopening-policy-tracker/" target="_blank">state and local reopening plans</a>.</p>
- Trump Admin Rejects CDC Reopening Guidelines - EcoWatch ›
- How Do You Stay Safe Now That States Are Reopening? - EcoWatch ›
- Florida Breaks U.S. Daily Record With Over 15,000 New ... ›
By Eoin Higgins
Over 300 groups on Monday urged Senate leadership to reject a bill currently under consideration that would incentivize communities to sell off their public water supplies to private companies for pennies on the dollar.
<div id="fea63" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9a6f211c2bc5aedd34837944cb8eeedf"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1281000111481294849" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Water in Illinois is overwhelmingly public. Why is Tammy Duckworth sponsoring a bill that aims to change that? https://t.co/1V36Kkd99s</div> — The American Prospect (@The American Prospect)<a href="https://twitter.com/TheProspect/statuses/1281000111481294849">1594249201.0</a></blockquote></div>
- DNC Ignores Progressive Climate Activists - EcoWatch ›
- Who's a Climate Champion and Who's a Climate Disaster? - EcoWatch ›