A Comparative Anatomy of Oil Price Routs: A Review of Four Price Routs between 1985 and 2014
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
With layoffs and cutbacks in the oilpatch and the ripple effects spreading out through Canada’s economy, it may seem as though the latest drop in oil prices could stall the economic engine in Alberta for a long time. This paper argues, however, that the current rout is unlike the other three major ones (when the price of oil dropped 60 per cent or more) experienced in the last 30 years. The factors affecting the oil price drop and its potential for rebound differ significantly. The routs of 2008 and 1997 were mostly demand-driven, triggered by credit crises in key markets. Both 2014 and 1985 started as demand-driven, too, but significantly, they changed to supply-driven crashes. There, however, the similarities end between today and 30 years ago. Fears that we may be in for a long-term rout, similar to that of 1985, which lasted more than a decade, may be allayed by examining the very different circumstances surrounding the contemporary situation. Given an uninspiring macroeconomic outlook, a supply-side solution will be imperative. A critical difference lies in the security of spare productive capacity. In 1985, OPEC’s spare capacity approached twenty per cent of world demand. Today, it is closer to two per cent. Moreover, today’s producer of the disruptive non-OPEC barrels in the shale oil industry in particular is far more reliant on external financing than were companies developing, for example, the North Sea 30 years ago. Then, with much higher prime rates, firms largely self-generated their financing. In addition, there was considerable room for cost-cutting, enabling increased production and therefore prolongation of the crash. If any silver lining can be found in the roiling storm clouds of the current rout, it is that the pendulum could swing sharply back by decade’s end. Natural production declines in old fields and investment cutbacks and cancellations around the world will eventually register in market balances once record inventories are drawn down. However we are likely to see a bumpy rise in prices rather than a steady recovery such as after 2009. The effects in Canada of the current rout are not Alberta’s alone to suffer, largely owing to the dominance of the resource, labour and technology-intensive oil sands business. Unlike 30 years ago, the oil sands industry is far more enmeshed with a broad spectrum of ancillary industries and activities across the country. Back then, the oil sands made up just 17 per cent of Canada’s total production of crude oil; today, that figure is over 62 per cent. The impacts of the oil sands industry thus are pan-Canadian. The lesson for Alberta and Canada is to rely less on oil-price projections from the seers in the U.S. financial business, who are transfixed by the shale oil industry. Shale oil’s already weak financial viability is even more precarious as the U.S. Federal Reserve ponders a rate hike. This crash was triggered by the over-supply from U.S. shale and Canadian oil sands and the response by Saudi Arabia to hold its market share and to not cut its production. It behoves Canada and Alberta to be more pro-active and pay closer and critical attention to OPEC and in particular to signals from the Gulf producers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,022 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».