| 
		THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: The Oil 
		Bubble: "When Shell announced earlier this year that its oil and gas 
		reserves were down by 30%, there was a global outcry.": Saturday 8 
		October 2005 October 8, 2005
 We keep hearing the word "bubble" to describe 
		industries with rapid and unsustainable rising prices. Hence, the 
		Internet bubble, the telecom bubble, stock market bubble, and now, some 
		analysts believe, a housing bubble. Yet for some mysterious reason no 
		one speaks of the oil bubble -- though prices have tripled in two years 
		to as high as $70 a barrel. Reviewing the history of oil-market boom and bust 
		confirms that we are in the midst of a classic oil bubble and that 
		prices will eventually fall, perhaps dramatically. Despite apocalyptic 
		warnings, the world is not running out of oil and the pumps are not 
		going to run dry in our lifetimes -- or ever. What's more, the mechanism 
		that will surely prevent any long-term catastrophic shortages in energy 
		is precisely the free-market incentive to make profits that many 
		politicians in Washington seem to regard as an evil pursuit and wish to 
		short circuit. The best evidence for an oil bubble comes from the 
		lessons of America's last six energy crises dating back to the late 19th 
		century, when there was a great scare about the industrial age grinding 
		to a halt because of impending shortages of coal. (Today coal is 
		superabundant, with about 500 years of supply.) Each one of these crises 
		has run almost an identical course. First, the crisis begins with a spike in energy 
		prices as a result of a short-term supply shock. Next, higher prices 
		bring doomsday claims of energy shortages, which in turn prompts 
		government to intervene ineffectually into the marketplace. In the end, 
		the advent of new technologies and new energy discoveries -- all 
		inspired by the profit motive -- brings the crisis to an abrupt end, 
		enabling oil and electricity markets to resume their virtuous longterm 
		downward price trend. The limits-to-growth crowd has predicted the end of 
		oil since the days when this black gold was first discovered as an 
		energy source in the mid-19th century. In the 1860s the U.S. Geological 
		Survey forecast that there was "little or no chance" that oil would be 
		found in Texas or California. In 1914 the Interior Department forecast 
		that there was only a 10-year supply of oil left; in 1939 it calculated 
		there was only a 13-year supply left, and in 1951 Interior warned that 
		by the mid-1960s the oil wells would certainly run dry. In the 1970s, 
		Jimmy Carter somberly told the nation that "we could use up all of the 
		proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next 
		decade." We can ridicule these doom and gloom predictions 
		today, but at the time they were taken seriously by scholars and 
		politicians, just as the energy alarmists are gaining intellectual 
		traction today. But as the late economist Julian Simon taught, by any 
		meaningful measure oil (and all natural resources) has gotten steadily 
		cheaper and far more bountiful in supply over time, despite periodic and 
		even wild fluctuations in the market. * * *If gasoline cost today what it cost a family in 1900 
		(relative to income), we would be paying not $3 but $10 a gallon at the 
		pump. Or consider that in 1860 oil sold for $4 a barrel, or the 
		equivalent of about $400 a barrel in today's wage-adjusted prices. The 
		first of a continuous series of innovations, in this case the invention 
		of modern drilling techniques in 1869, cut the price by more than 90% -- 
		to 35 cents a barrel. Fifty years ago people would have laughed out loud 
		at the idea of drilling for oil at the bottom of the ocean or getting 
		fuel from sand, both of which were technologically infeasible. The first 
		deep-sea oil rig went on line in 1965 and drilled 500 feet down. Now 
		these rigs drill two miles into the ground -- and miraculously, the 
		price of extracting oil from 10,000 feet deep in the sea bed today is 
		approaching the cost of drilling 100 feet down from the richest fields 
		in Texas or Saudi Arabia 40 years ago. This spectacular pace of technological progress 
		explains why over time the amount of recoverable reserves of oil has 
		increased, not fallen. Between 1980 and 2002 the amount of known global 
		oil reserves increased by 300 billion barrels, according to a survey by 
		British Petroleum. Rather than the oil fields running dry, just the 
		opposite has been happening. In 1970 Saudi Arabia had 88 billion barrels 
		of known oil. Thirty-five years later, nearly 100 billion barrels have 
		been extracted and yet the latest forecast is that there are still 264 
		billion barrels left -- although the Saudis have never allowed 
		independent auditors to verify these numbers. In this industry, alas, bad news tends to crowd out 
		the good. When Shell announced earlier this year that its oil and gas 
		reserves were down by 30%, there was a global outcry. But when Canada 
		announced in 2004 that it has more recoverable oil from tar sands than 
		there is oil in Saudi Arabia, the world yawned. There is estimated to be 
		about as much oil recoverable from the shale rocks in Colorado and other 
		western states as in all the oil fields of OPEC nations. Yes, the cost 
		of getting that oil is still prohibitively expensive, but the 
		combination of today's high fuel prices and improved extraction 
		techniques means that the break-even point for exploiting it is getting 
		ever closer. The energy Malthusians counter that China, India and 
		other nations will satisfy their growing appetite for oil by driving 
		demand and prices ever higher. In the short term, yes. But over the 
		longer term, as the Chinese become more prosperous through free markets, 
		China will become vastly more fuel efficient and also help discover new 
		sources of energy. America produces twice as much output per unit of 
		energy consumed as it did 50 years ago. Liberals who say we need 
		government to intervene in the energy markets, to patch the alleged 
		failings of the free market, fail to comprehend that the 
		command-and-control economies of the last 50 years have been far and 
		away the biggest wasters of energy (and the biggest polluters). South 
		Korea produces about three times as much output per kilowatt of 
		electricity as North Korea does. This is no call for complacency or inaction in the 
		face of very high energy prices; it's a call for realism. Higher prices 
		for gas and fuel for home heating have cost the average U.S. family 
		about $1,500 to $2,000 a year. (Thankfully the Bush tax cuts have given 
		back about precisely that amount in lower tax payments to the IRS.) The 
		tax on the American economy from higher oil prices has reached $300 
		million a day and has chopped nearly a percentage point off GDP growth. * * *Our point is that the constraints on our ability to 
		find and extract new oil are not geologic or scientific. The real 
		constraints on oil production are barriers created by government. Myron 
		Ebell, an environmental analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, 
		notes that roughly 90% of the oil on the planet rests under 
		government-owned land and these resources are abysmally managed. In the U.S., environmentalists have erected myriad 
		barriers to drilling for new sources of oil. The American Petroleum 
		Institute estimates that there are at least 100 billion barrels that are 
		fairly easily recoverable in Alaska and offshore that oil companies are 
		not permitted to exploit. Once, we could afford the luxury of not 
		drilling there. Now, thanks to a witch's brew of unforeseen 
		circumstances -- political turmoil in the oil producing countries, 
		China's surge in demand, and hurricanes that have knocked out Gulf 
		refineries -- it's an economic and national security imperative that we 
		do. Here's one simple idea to increase the domestic 
		supply of oil: Have Uncle Sam share its oil-drilling royalties with the 
		California government. If Californians realized they could go a long way 
		to solving their deficit and overtaxation problems by raising billions 
		of these petro-dollars, the aversion on the left coast toward offshore 
		drilling might well begin to subside. We will assess at another time the many dreadful 
		ideas -- price controls and "windfall profit" taxes -- that Congress is 
		considering to deal with the energy crisis. But for today it is 
		sufficient to note that the free market will deliver oil, electricity 
		and other forms of energy at declining prices in the future, if only the 
		government will let the market's benign and productive forces work their 
		magic.   |