IMG Investor Dnes Bloombergtv Bulgaria On Air Gol Tialoto Az-jenata Puls Teenproblem Automedia Imoti.net Rabota Az-deteto Blog Start Posoka Boec Megavselena.bg
Контролен панел | Съобщения | Потребители | Търси
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Съобщение

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Петрол Брент: Прогноза за ръст до $150-$200

Collapse
X
  • Филтър
  • Време
  • Покажи
Clear All
new posts

  • PERHAPS 60% OF TODAY'S OIL
    PRICE IS PURE SPECULATION
    by F. William Engdahl
    May 2, 2008

    The price of crude oil today is not made according to any traditional relation of supply to demand. It’s controlled by an elaborate financial market system as well as by the four major Anglo-American oil companies. As much as 60% of today’s crude oil price is pure speculation driven by large trader banks and hedge funds. It has nothing to do with the convenient myths of Peak Oil. It has to do with control of oil and its price. How?

    First, the crucial role of the international oil exchanges in London and New York is crucial to the game. Nymex in New York and the ICE Futures in London today control global benchmark oil prices which in turn set most of the freely traded oil cargo. They do so via oil futures contracts on two grades of crude oil—West Texas Intermediate and North Sea Brent.

    A third rather new oil exchange, the Dubai Mercantile Exchange (DME), trading Dubai crude, is more or less a daughter of Nymex, with Nymex President, James Newsome, sitting on the board of DME and most key personnel British or American citizens.

    Brent is used in spot and long-term contracts to value as much of crude oil produced in global oil markets each day. The Brent price is published by a private oil industry publication, Platt’s. Major oil producers including Russia and Nigeria use Brent as a benchmark for pricing the crude they produce. Brent is a key crude blend for the European market and, to some extent, for Asia.

    WTI has historically been more of a US crude oil basket. Not only is it used as the basis for US-traded oil futures, but it's also a key benchmark for US production.

    ‘The tail that wags the dog’

    All this is well and official. But how today’s oil prices are really determined is done by a process so opaque only a handful of major oil trading banks such as Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley have any idea who is buying and who selling oil futures or derivative contracts that set physical oil prices in this strange new world of “paper oil.”

    With the development of unregulated international derivatives trading in oil futures over the past decade or more, the way has opened for the present speculative bubble in oil prices.

    Since the advent of oil futures trading and the two major London and New York oil futures contracts, control of oil prices has left OPEC and gone to Wall Street. It is a classic case of the “tail that wags the dog.”

    A June 2006 US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report on “The Role of Market Speculation in rising oil and gas prices,” noted, “…there is substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices.”

    What the Senate committee staff documented in the report was a gaping loophole in US Government regulation of oil derivatives trading so huge a herd of elephants could walk through it. That seems precisely what they have been doing in ramping oil prices through the roof in recent months.

    The Senate report was ignored in the media and in the Congress.

    The report pointed out that the Commodity Futures Trading Trading Commission, a financial futures regulator, had been mandated by Congress to ensure that prices on the futures market reflect the laws of supply and demand rather than manipulative practices or excessive speculation. The US Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) states, “Excessive speculation in any commodity under contracts of sale of such commodity for future delivery . . . causing sudden or unreasonable fluctuations or unwarranted changes in the price of such commodity, is an undue and unnecessary burden on interstate commerce in such commodity.”

    Further, the CEA directs the CFTC to establish such trading limits “as the Commission finds are necessary to diminish, eliminate, or prevent such burden.” Where is the CFTC now that we need such limits?

    they seem to have deliberately walked away from their mandated oversight responsibilities in the world’s most important traded commodity, oil.

    Enron has the last laugh…

    As that US Senate report noted:

    “Until recently, US energy futures were traded exclusively on regulated exchanges within the United States, like the NYMEX, which are subject to extensive oversight by the CFTC,including ongoing monitoring to detect and prevent price manipulation or fraud. In recent years, however, there has been a tremendous growth in the trading of contracts that look and are structured just like futures contracts, but which are traded on unregulated OTC electronic markets. Because of their similarity to futures contracts they are often called “futures look-alikes.”

    The only practical difference between futures look-alike contracts and futures contracts is that the look-alikes are traded in unregulated markets whereas futures are traded on regulated exchanges. The trading of energy commodities by large firms on OTC electronic exchanges was exempted from CFTC oversight by a provision inserted at the behest of Enron and other large energy traders into the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 in the waning hours of the 106th Congress.

    The impact on market oversight has been substantial. NYMEX traders, for example, are required to keep records of all trades and report large trades to the CFTC. These Large Trader Reports, together with daily trading data providing price and volume information, are the CFTC’s primary tools to gauge the extent of speculation in the markets and to detect, prevent, and prosecute price manipulation. CFTC Chairman Reuben Jeffrey recently stated:

    “The Commission’s Large Trader information system is one of the cornerstones of our surveillance program and enables detection of concentrated and coordinated positions that might be used by one or more traders to attempt manipulation.”

    In contrast to trades conducted on the NYMEX, traders on unregulated OTC electronic exchanges are not required to keep records or file Large Trader Reports with the CFTC, and these trades are exempt from routine CFTC oversight. In contrast to trades conducted on regulated futures exchanges, there is no limit on the number of contracts a speculator may hold on an unregulated OTC electronic exchange, no monitoring of trading by the exchange itself, and no reporting of the amount of outstanding contracts (“open interest”) at the end of each day.”

    Then, apparently to make sure the way was opened really wide to potential market oil price manipulation, in January 2006, the Bush Administration’s CFTC permitted the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), the leading operator of electronic energy exchanges, to use its trading terminals in the United States for the trading of US crude oil futures on the ICE futures exchange in London – called “ICE Futures.”

    Previously, the ICE Futures exchange in London had traded only in European energy commodities – Brent crude oil and United Kingdom natural gas. As a United Kingdom futures market, the ICE Futures exchange is regulated solely by the UK Financial Services Authority. In 1999, the London exchange obtained the CFTC’s permission to install computer terminals in the United States to permit traders in New York and other US cities to trade European energy commodities through the ICE exchange.

    The CFTC opens the door

    Then, in January 2006, ICE Futures in London began trading a futures contract for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil, a type of crude oil that is produced and delivered in the United States. ICE Futures also notified the CFTC that it would be permitting traders in the United States to use ICE terminals in the United States to trade its new WTI contract on the ICE Futures London exchange. ICE Futures as well allowed traders in the United States to trade US gasoline and heating oil futures on the ICE Futures exchange in London.

    Despite the use by US traders of trading terminals within the United States to trade US oil, gasoline, and heating oil futures contracts, the CFTC has until today refused to assert any jurisdiction over the trading of these contracts.

    Persons within the United States seeking to trade key US energy commodities – US crude oil, gasoline, and heating oil futures – are able to avoid all US market oversight or reporting requirements by routing their trades through the ICE Futures exchange in London instead of the NYMEX in New York.

    Is that not elegant? The US Government energy futures regulator, CFTC opened the way to the present unregulated and highly opaque oil futures speculation. It may just be coincidence that the present CEO of NYMEX, James Newsome, who also sits on the Dubai Exchange, is a former chairman of the US CFTC. In Washington doors revolve quite smoothly between private and public posts.

    A glance at the price for Brent and WTI futures prices since January 2006 indicates the remarkable correlation between skyrocketing oil prices and the unregulated trade in ICE oil futures in US markets. Keep in mind that ICE Futures in London is owned and controlled by a USA company based in Atlanta Georgia.

    In January 2006 when the CFTC allowed the ICE Futures the gaping exception, oil prices were trading in the range of $59-60 a barrel. Today some two years later we see prices tapping $120 and trend upwards. This is not an OPEC problem, it is a US Government regulatory problem of malign neglect.

    By not requiring the ICE to file daily reports of large trades of energy commodities, it is not able to detect and deter price manipulation. As the Senate report noted,

    “The CFTC's ability to detect and deter energy price manipulation is suffering from critical information gaps, because traders on OTC electronic exchanges and the London ICE Futures are currently exempt from CFTC reporting requirements. Large trader reporting is also essential to analyzE the effect of speculation on energy prices.”

    The report added,

    “ICE's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other evidence indicate that its over-the-counter electronic exchange performs a price discovery function -- and thereby affects US energy prices -- in the cash market for the energy commodities traded on that exchange.”

    Hedge Funds and Banks driving oil prices

    In the most recent sustained run-up in energy prices, large financial institutions, hedge funds, pension funds, and other investors have been pouring billions of dollars into the energy commodities markets to try to take advantage of price changes or hedge against them. Most of this additional investment has not come from producers or consumers of these commodities, but from speculators seeking to take advantage of these price changes. The CFTC defines a speculator as a person who “does not produce or use the commodity, but risks his or her own capital trading futures in that commodity in hopes of making a profit on price changes.”

    The large purchases of crude oil futures contracts by speculators have, in effect, created an additional demand for oil, driving up the price of oil for future delivery in the same manner that additional demand for contracts for the delivery of a physical barrel today drives up the price for oil on the spot market. As far as the market is concerned, the demand for a barrel of oil that results from the purchase of a futures contract by a speculator is just as real as the demand for a barrel that results from the purchase of a futures contract by a refiner or other user of petroleum.

    Perhaps 60% of oil prices today pure speculation

    Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley today are the two leading energy trading firms in the United States. Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase are major players and fund numerous hedge funds as well who speculate.

    In June 2006, oil traded in futures markets at some $60 a barrel and the Senate investigation estimated that some $25 of that was due to pure financial speculation. One analyst estimated in August 2005 that US oil inventory levels suggested WTI crude prices should be around $25 a barrel, and not $60.

    That would mean today that at least $50 to $60 or more of today’s $115 a barrel price is due to pure hedge fund and financial institution speculation. However, given the unchanged equilibrium in global oil supply and demand over recent months amid the explosive rise in oil futures prices traded on Nymex and ICE exchanges in New York and London it is more likely that as much as 60% of the today oil price is pure speculation. No one knows officially except the tiny handful of energy trading banks in New York and London and they certainly aren’t talking.

    By purchasing large numbers of futures contracts, and thereby pushing up futures prices to even higher levels than current prices, speculators have provided a financial incentive for oil companies to buy even more oil and place it in storage. A refiner will purchase extra oil today, even if it costs $115 per barrel, if the futures price is even higher.

    As a result, over the past two years crude oil inventories have been steadily growing, resulting in US crude oil inventories that are now higher than at any time in the previous eight years. The large influx of speculative investment into oil futures has led to a situation where we have both high supplies of crude oil and high crude oil prices.

    Compelling evidence also suggests that the oft-cited geopolitical, economic, and natural factors do not explain the recent rise in energy prices can be seen in the actual data on crude oil supply and demand. Although demand has significantly increased over the past few years, so have supplies.

    Over the past couple of years global crude oil production has increased along with the increases in demand; in fact, during this period global supplies have exceeded demand, according to the US Department of Energy. The US Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently forecast that in the next few years global surplus production capacity will continue to grow to between 3 and 5 million barrels per day by 2010, thereby “substantially thickening the surplus capacity cushion.”

    Dollar and oil link

    A common speculation strategy amid a declining USA economy and a falling US dollar is for speculators and ordinary investment funds desperate for more profitable investments amid the US securitization disaster, to take futures positions selling the dollar “short” and oil “long.”

    For huge US or EU pension funds or banks desperate to get profits following the collapse in earnings since August 2007 and the US real estate crisis, oil is one of the best ways to get huge speculative gains. The backdrop that supports the current oil price bubble is continued unrest in the Middle East, in Sudan, in Venezuela and Pakistan and firm oil demand in China and most of the world outside the US. Speculators trade on rumor, not fact.

    In turn, once major oil companies and refiners in North America and EU countries begin to hoard oil, supplies appear even tighter lending background support to present prices.

    Because the over-the-counter (OTC) and London ICE Futures energy markets are unregulated, there are no precise or reliable figures as to the total dollar value of recent spending on investments in energy commodities, but the estimates are consistently in the range of tens of billions of dollars.

    The increased speculative interest in commodities is also seen in the increasing popularity
    of commodity index funds, which are funds whose price is tied to the price of a basket of various commodity futures. Goldman Sachs estimates that pension funds and mutual funds have invested a total of approximately $85 billion in commodity index funds, and that investments in its own index, the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (GSCI), has tripled over the past few years. Notable is the fact that the US Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, is former Chairman of Goldman Sachs.


    © 2008 F. William Engdahl
    I tozi balon ste se spuka .... Togava equities ste trugnat seriozno nagore.

    Коментар


    • Arjun Murti ot Goldman sachs predreche tekushtite niva na petrola predi 3 godini vijte statiata

      sega dava nov target ot $150-200 ako pak poznae shte stane strashno ...slagaite gazovi uredbi na automobilite

      Published on 19 Apr 2005 by Fortune Magazine. Archived on 19 Apr 2005.
      Are Oil Prices Headed for a 'Super Spike'?

      by Andy Serwer
      RELATED NEWS:


      The news spread instantly across Wall Street trading desks on a Thursday morning at the end of March: "Some analyst at Goldman Sachs says oil is going to $105 a barrel! He's calling it a 'super spike'!" Within minutes the price of oil was surging—a day later it would hit a new high of $58 a barrel. Angry investors lashed out at Goldman, calling the report preposterous and accusing the firm of manipulating the market to benefit its energy-trading desk. There were calls for a government investigation.
      The host of one cable TV business show wondered whether the guy who
      made the call had "some type of insidious background." A week later, at
      the firm's annual shareholders' meeting, Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson felt compelled to defend the report and the integrity of the analyst
      and his firm. Whew! Such is the nature of the oil markets these days.
      So just who is this super-spike man, and what in the world was
      he thinking? Well, his name is Arjun Murti, and he's a veteran oil
      analyst and a managing director at Goldman. Press-shy by nature anyway, the poor guy was so unsettled by the reaction to his report that he refused all interview requests—until, that is, I was able to persuade
      him to take my call. He declined to have his photograph taken for this
      story.

      Some will say that Murti should have realized that his prediction would cause outrage. Not necessarily. First of all, Murti's report is a thoughtful, 30-page piece of logical analysis that was grossly oversimplified by most of the media. (Al Jazeera ran one of the more reasonable reaction stories.) Second, Murti had previously raised the notion of a super spike in two reports last year—in June and September—forecasting a then sensational peak price of $80 a barrel.


      Last, the theory circulating that he wrote the report to benefit Goldman's trading desk is idiotic. (If or when Goldman pulls a lever to jack one of its trading positions, let's face it, you wouldn't know about it!) The crux of Murti's theory is simple: We're in the middle of a classic boom-and-bust cycle. The economy has been heating up here and in China, which pushes up the cost of crude. When the price of oil—and especially, here in the U.S., of gasoline—climbs too high, it curbs economic activity, which then depresses the demand for oil, causing prices to drop. Nothing revolutionary there. For now, though, demand for crude is continuing to rise—if a little more slowly than last year.

      That means prices could go higher. Remember: In terms of 2005 dollars,
      oil peaked in 1980 at $85 a barrel. But isn't all this talk about a super spike a little hysterical? "All I did was to raise the high end of my price band from $80 a barrel to $105 a barrel," says Murti. "Spending on gasoline in the U.S. relative to the overall economy is still well below where it was in 1980-81. So demand could still climb from here." To get to his peak price of $105 a barrel, Murti says, there would probably have to be a disruption in supply, as from some major terrorist action. "Most
      investors are only familiar with oil cycles in the 1990s, when the price modulated gradually and moderately," Murti says. "The current environment is more like the 1970s." That may not sound like great news
      for consumers or business, but remember that the '70s weren't a bad
      time to own oil stocks. Which is the point of Murti's report in the
      first place. He's an oil analyst. Recommending oil stocks is his
      primary charge. (Exxon, Amerada Hess, and Murphy Oil are three of his picks; for some unconventional oil plays, see Pipers That Still Pay.)
      His mistake may have been broadcasting that the price of a barrel of
      oil could soon resemble an NBA score. Investors who cry foul might be
      making a mistake by tuning him out.

      Коментар


      • Първоначално изпратено от Мариян Йорданов
        Първоначално изпратено от cymru
        Значи $=левче
        Здравейте, ето графика на Брент в EUR за барел

        http://www.investor.bg/?cat=190

        за последната година поскъпването е над 50%
        в долари е 72%

        тоест силното евро не ни спестява много
        http://www.investor.bg/?cat=5&id=63140
        Estestveno 4e ne ni spasiava silnoto Evro.V Evropa e po goliam danaka i akciza na Petrola a v Usa e mnogo po malak i zatova karat po evtin benzin ot nas.Tova 4e $ e po slab pak ne ima se uveli4ava tolkova gorivoto tam otkolkoto tuk v Evropa

        Коментар


        • Арабите продължават да трупат финикийски знаци.

          След някоя година ще ни завземат ....

          Така е, като нямаш ....
          Недвижими имоти [URL=http://bit.

          Коментар


          • Първоначално изпратено от the shark
            Първоначално изпратено от Мариян Йорданов
            Първоначално изпратено от cymru
            Значи $=левче
            Здравейте, ето графика на Брент в EUR за барел

            http://www.investor.bg/?cat=190

            за последната година поскъпването е над 50%
            в долари е 72%

            тоест силното евро не ни спестява много
            http://www.investor.bg/?cat=5&id=63140
            Истината е, че петролът никога не е бил над 78 евро за барел, колкото е днес.
            Още малко и някой ще охка!!!

            Коментар


            • Първоначално изпратено от Мариян Йорданов
              Първоначално изпратено от cymru
              Значи $=левче
              Здравейте, ето графика на Брент в EUR за барел

              http://www.investor.bg/?cat=190

              за последната година поскъпването е над 50%
              в долари е 72%

              тоест силното евро не ни спестява много
              http://www.investor.bg/?cat=5&id=63140
              Истината е, че петролът никога не е бил над 78 евро за барел, колкото е днес.

              Коментар


              • Първоначално изпратено от cymru
                Значи $=левче
                Здравейте, ето графика на Брент в EUR за барел

                http://www.investor.bg/?cat=190

                за последната година поскъпването е над 50%
                в долари е 72%

                тоест силното евро не ни спестява много
                http://www.investor.bg/?cat=5&id=63140

                Коментар


                • Пълни глупости.......... забравили са да изчислят и колко кила храна(пак е енергия) папаме спрямо БВП..... тогава и на диета( чист глад) трябва да минем.
                  Освен да разберем че ни е малък БВП за друго не служи тоя показател...

                  Коментар


                  • Първоначално изпратено от mvr0306
                    Господа, вие замисляте ли се колко неефективна е бг икономика? При растящите цени на петрола, мисля отчетите на компаниите са повече от логични, а след 3 месеца ще бъде още по-зле. Живял съм доста години в Германия и като правя сравнение между двете страни винаги ме учудва ужасното разхищение на енергия и горива в Бг. Ами в Бг магазина с площ от най-много 90-100м2 дето е под блока където живея има на ден поне 20 доставчика с микробуси - някой идва от съседен град да докара 2 кашона с вафли, друг идва за 20 кофички кисело мляко, трети за една щайга салам...това ефективно ли е питам аз, и после защо икономиката ни е в такова състояние? Изгореният бензин е издухан във въздуха национален кпитал. Нищо чудно че сме първенци в цяла Европа по пилеене на гориво - поствам статия от един друг сайт по този повод.


                    През днешния 15 април имаше изобилие от световни новини, свързани с петрола. Цените на суровината поставиха нов рекорд от $113.38 за барел. Един от водещите енергетици на ЛУКОЙЛ заяви, че Русия е достигнала своя oil peak и добивите на черното злато там никога няма да могат да се върнат на нивата от последните седем години. За приятен завършек се разбра, че край бреговете на Бразилия е открито може би третото в света по размер петролно находище с предполагаеми запаси от 33 млрд. барела.

                    Добивът на нефт в България е пренебрежимо малък (по информация от 2003 г. възлиза на 2900 барела дневно). Прозаичната първа петролна новина би трябвало да е от особен интерес за нашата икономика. Логично е да се помисли, че не разполагащата с петролни залежи България, принудена да внася 37 пъти повече петрол, отколкото произвежда, се отнася пестеливо с този невъзобновяем и твърде мръсен при консумация ресурс.

                    Нищо подобно. По данни на европейската статистическа служба Евростат, икономиката на България е най-енергоемка в цяла Европа, или казано по друг начин, България е страната, която в цяла Европа е най-малко пестелива откъм петрол. Честит рекорд за най-ниско КПД.

                    Както може да се види на картата горе, България заедно с Латвия, Литва, Естония, Чехия и Словакия попада сред държавите, които изразходват най-много петролен еквивалент за създаване на единица добавена стойност. По показател брутна вътрешна консумация на енергия, разделена на БВП (килограми петролен еквивалент на 1000 евро), България за 2005 година постига впечатляващия показател 1582.41.

                    Ние сме единствената държава освен Румъния, която през 2005 година има четирицифрена стойност за този коефициент, но румънците с 1164 кг петрол за 1000 евро все пак остават далеч под нас, както може да се види на гарфиката долу.

                    Европейските статистици ни предлагат за сравнение и данните за енергийната ефективност на икономиките на САЩ, Япония и Еврозоната от тринадесет държави. Японците с 118 кг. петрол за създаването на 1000 евро изглеждат като извънземни на българския фон. Еврозоната с 183 кг петрол/1000 евро няма от какво да се срамува. Но да си отбележим, че „разхитителите" САЩ с еквивалента на 302 кг. петрол/ 1000 евро имат над пет пъти по-ефективна икономика от българската (говорим само в енергийно отношение).

                    Ако икономиката на България при сегашната си ефективност бе с размерите на САЩ ... ето тогава щеше да види светът какво е истинска продоволствена, енергийна и екологична криза.

                    Но това не е всичко. Върхът на енергийната неефективност на България е постигнат през 1996 г., когато за създаването на продукция за 1000 евро са ни били нужни 2543 кг. петрол. В таблицата за европейско сравнение действително няма подобна цифра.

                    Няма проблеми. Значи в рамките на десет години сме повишили енергийната ефективност на нашата икономика с 40% - вероятно така нашите държавни служители отчитат своите успехи.
                    Долавям оптимизма в мнението ти.

                    Коментар


                    • Караме стари трошки от запада, дето освен, че ни хвърлят в разходи за авточасти и ремонти, ами и повече харчат, понеже са със стари двигатели, агати домакинствата, как смогват, да се чуди човек?

                      Коментар


                      • Господа, вие замисляте ли се колко неефективна е бг икономика? При растящите цени на петрола, мисля отчетите на компаниите са повече от логични, а след 3 месеца ще бъде още по-зле. Живял съм доста години в Германия и като правя сравнение между двете страни винаги ме учудва ужасното разхищение на енергия и горива в Бг. Ами в Бг магазина с площ от най-много 90-100м2 дето е под блока където живея има на ден поне 20 доставчика с микробуси - някой идва от съседен град да докара 2 кашона с вафли, друг идва за 20 кофички кисело мляко, трети за една щайга салам...това ефективно ли е питам аз, и после защо икономиката ни е в такова състояние? Изгореният бензин е издухан във въздуха национален кпитал. Нищо чудно че сме първенци в цяла Европа по пилеене на гориво - поствам статия от един друг сайт по този повод.


                        През днешния 15 април имаше изобилие от световни новини, свързани с петрола. Цените на суровината поставиха нов рекорд от $113.38 за барел. Един от водещите енергетици на ЛУКОЙЛ заяви, че Русия е достигнала своя oil peak и добивите на черното злато там никога няма да могат да се върнат на нивата от последните седем години. За приятен завършек се разбра, че край бреговете на Бразилия е открито може би третото в света по размер петролно находище с предполагаеми запаси от 33 млрд. барела.

                        Добивът на нефт в България е пренебрежимо малък (по информация от 2003 г. възлиза на 2900 барела дневно). Прозаичната първа петролна новина би трябвало да е от особен интерес за нашата икономика. Логично е да се помисли, че не разполагащата с петролни залежи България, принудена да внася 37 пъти повече петрол, отколкото произвежда, се отнася пестеливо с този невъзобновяем и твърде мръсен при консумация ресурс.

                        Нищо подобно. По данни на европейската статистическа служба Евростат, икономиката на България е най-енергоемка в цяла Европа, или казано по друг начин, България е страната, която в цяла Европа е най-малко пестелива откъм петрол. Честит рекорд за най-ниско КПД.

                        Както може да се види на картата горе, България заедно с Латвия, Литва, Естония, Чехия и Словакия попада сред държавите, които изразходват най-много петролен еквивалент за създаване на единица добавена стойност. По показател брутна вътрешна консумация на енергия, разделена на БВП (килограми петролен еквивалент на 1000 евро), България за 2005 година постига впечатляващия показател 1582.41.

                        Ние сме единствената държава освен Румъния, която през 2005 година има четирицифрена стойност за този коефициент, но румънците с 1164 кг петрол за 1000 евро все пак остават далеч под нас, както може да се види на гарфиката долу.

                        Европейските статистици ни предлагат за сравнение и данните за енергийната ефективност на икономиките на САЩ, Япония и Еврозоната от тринадесет държави. Японците с 118 кг. петрол за създаването на 1000 евро изглеждат като извънземни на българския фон. Еврозоната с 183 кг петрол/1000 евро няма от какво да се срамува. Но да си отбележим, че „разхитителите" САЩ с еквивалента на 302 кг. петрол/ 1000 евро имат над пет пъти по-ефективна икономика от българската (говорим само в енергийно отношение).

                        Ако икономиката на България при сегашната си ефективност бе с размерите на САЩ ... ето тогава щеше да види светът какво е истинска продоволствена, енергийна и екологична криза.

                        Но това не е всичко. Върхът на енергийната неефективност на България е постигнат през 1996 г., когато за създаването на продукция за 1000 евро са ни били нужни 2543 кг. петрол. В таблицата за европейско сравнение действително няма подобна цифра.

                        Няма проблеми. Значи в рамките на десет години сме повишили енергийната ефективност на нашата икономика с 40% - вероятно така нашите държавни служители отчитат своите успехи.

                        Коментар


                        • НЕМОЖЕ ДА СЕ ПРАВИ АНАЛИЗ , КАКТО НЯКОЙ СПЕЦИАЛИСТИ ПРАВЯТ ВЪВ ФОРУМА.

                          САМО ЕДИН МОЛЕБЕН ДА МУ СПРЕТНЕМ.
                          ПРЕД БЕНЗИНОСТАНЦИИТЕ ( ШЕГА) И ДА СЕ МОЛИМ ЦЕНАТА ДА НЕ СКОЧИ НА 3 ЛВ . ЩОТО ТОГАВА МАЙКА ДА НИ Е ЖАЛНА. ТА ЩЕ ВИДИТЕ НАЕМИ , ИПОТЕКИ , ЗАПЛАТИ ОТ 2000 ЛВ , БОРСИ И .......
                          ЯВНО ГОРЕЩО ЛЯТО ЩЕ НИ СПРЕТНАТ.
                          Tova e BFB , zasega e taka !

                          Коментар


                          • Значи $=левче
                            Не-заслужил инвеститор

                            Коментар


                            • Петрол Брент: Прогноза за ръст до $150-$200

                              150-200$ за барел петрол, означава ли това, че България ще изпадне в дълбока рецесия, поради неконкурентноспособност на икономиката си /дори туризма ни едва смогва/ и тежка зависмост от енергийните носители?



                              http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...630&refer=home



                              Goldman's Murti Says Oil `Likely' to Reach $150-$200 (Update4)

                              By Nesa Subrahmaniyan

                              May 6 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil may rise to between $150 and $200 a barrel within two years as growth in supply fails to keep pace with increased demand from developing nations, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analysts led by Arjun N. Murti said in a report.

                              New York-based Murti first wrote of a ``super spike'' in March 2005, when he said oil prices could range between $50 and $105 a barrel through 2009. The price of crude traded in New York averaged $56.71 in 2005, $66.23 in 2006 and $72.36 in 2007. Oil rose to an intraday record $120.93 today on speculation demand will rise during the peak U.S. summer driving season.

                              ``The possibility of $150-$200 per barrel seems increasingly likely over the next six-24 months, though predicting the ultimate peak in oil prices as well as the remaining duration of the upcycle remains a major uncertainty,'' the Goldman analysts wrote in the report dated May 5.

                              A report yesterday showed U.S. service industries expanded in April, signaling higher energy use. The Institute for Supply Management said its index of non-manufacturing businesses, which make up almost 90 percent of the economy, grew for the first time since December. China is increasing refining capacity and boosting imports to meet rising demand for the Olympic Games.

                              U.S. gasoline demand typically climbs going into the summer season when Americans take to the highways for vacations. The peak-consumption period lasts from the Memorial Day weekend in late May to Labor Day in early September. Monthly fuel sales were the highest during August in five of the last six years, according to data from the Department of Energy.

                              China Consumption

                              China, the world's fastest-growing major economy, has more than doubled oil use since New York crude oil dropped to this decade's low of $16.70 a barrel on Nov. 19, 2001. Record prices have failed to stem rising consumption in developing nations, with demand led by China, India and the Middle East.

                              Price forecasts for spot U.S. benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude oil for 2008 to 2011 were revised higher by Goldman. The 2008 price estimate was raised to $108 a barrel from $96, the 2009 forecast to $110 from $105, and 2010 to 2011 estimates are projected at $120 from $110, the analysts said, citing slowing supply growth in Mexico and Russia, and low spare production capacity in OPEC.

                              Oil has also rallied amid a dispute between the U.S. and Iran regarding the Persian Gulf oil producer's plan to develop nuclear energy.

                              In Nigeria, Africa's biggest oil exporter, militants have attacked oil installations and kidnapped workers since the beginning of 2006, forcing Royal Dutch Shell Plc to halt output.

                              Venezuela Slump

                              In Venezuela, production has slumped to about 2.34 million barrels a day from almost 3 million barrels a day in 2002, according to Bloomberg's estimates, before President Hugo Chavez fired almost 20,000 workers who had closed the state oil company in an attempt to overthrow the government.

                              Iraq's oil production has yet to reach levels attained before the U.S.-led invasion of 2003 as the country struggles with sectarian fighting and attacks on its energy infrastructure.

                              Mexico's production has fallen below 3 million barrels a day since October as Petroleos Mexicanos, the state-owned oil company, failed to compensate for a 30 percent drop at Cantarell, its largest field, which accounts for 40 percent of output.

                              ``There are supply constraints with many producers, especially from non-OPEC struggling to find new reserves and China and Middle East demand keeps growing,'' said Victor Shum, senior principal at energy consultant Purvin & Gertz Inc. in Singapore. ``The fundamentals are prompting investors to get into oil in a big way and all that points to higher prices.''

                              OPEC Capacity

                              Spare production capacity of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries is low and the group's exports may fall because of ``lackluster'' supply growth and rising domestic consumption in member countries, the Goldman analysts said.

                              ``Non-OPEC supply is struggling to grow, with notable declines being seen in Mexico and Russia showing signs of rolling over following an extended period of rapid growth,'' said the analysts from Goldman, the world's biggest securities firm by market value.

                              Prices are also poised to gain as major oil-exporting countries restrict foreign investments, limiting supply growth, while demand from developing countries, or ``non-OECD'' nations is rising on economic expansion and power shortages, prompting higher demand for gasoil and fuel oil, the Goldman analysts said.

                              Crude oil for June delivery was trading at $120.47 a barrel, up 50 cents, at 8:42 a.m. in London in after-hours trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Yesterday, futures closed 3.1 percent up at $119.97 a barrel, the highest closing price since trading began in 1983.

                              `Super-Spike'

                              ``The core of our super-spike view has been that a lack of adequate supply growth coupled with price-insulated non-OECD demand growth'' is leading to higher prices, the analysts said. That could result in a ``sharp correction in oil demand,'' the Goldman analysts said.

                              Crude oil's increase above $100 a barrel was partly because of the dollar's decline against the euro, which boosted oil prices because it made commodities cheaper for buyers outside the U.S. and attracted investors as a hedge against inflation. Oil in New York touched $100 a barrel on Jan. 2.

                              The U.S. currency has declined 5.4 percent against the euro so far this year, and 11 percent last year.

                              Members of OPEC, which supplies about 40 percent of the world's oil, have said supplies are adequate and blamed speculators for pushing prices up to records. The producer group won't consider raising output before it meets in September as the market is well supplied, Qatari Oil Minister Abdullah al-Attiyah said on May 2.

                              There's a fundamental misperception that so-called speculators are driving prices to unjustified levels, the Goldman analysts said. ``Unfortunately, we do not think the energy crisis will be solved by finding and punishing the big bad speculator.''

                              Commodity investors, the Goldman analysts wrote, are ``helping to solve the energy crisis'' by speeding up the process for oil companies to spend more on energy projects and at the same time encourage efficiency.

                              To contact the reporter on this story: Nesa Subrahmaniyan in Singapore at nesas@bloomberg.net

                              Last Updated: May 6, 2008 05:14 EDT
                              42
                              Да
                              50.00%
                              21
                              Не
                              42.86%
                              18
                              Не искам да се замислям върху сериозни въпроси
                              7.14%
                              3
                            Working...
                            X