Ideosphere Forum

Re: fx-discuss: FX Claim pkol20 - Peak Oil < 2020

Author: chrisran.bma e-mail
Conversation: Re: fx-discuss: FX Claim pkol20 - Peak Oil < 2020 ( prev | next ) reply!
Topic: fx-discuss ( prev | next )
In-Reply-To: Neal Gafter's post
Followed-Up-By: Ken Kittlitz's post
Date: Fri Jun 28, 2019 08:56 am
Neal Gafter
chrisran.bma e-mail
Ken Kittlitz



Since no one else appears to have offered, can we make Neal the judge?

Regards

Chris Randles

(crandles 7886)

> On 14 June 2019 at 02:17 Neal Gafter <fx1@neal.gafter.com> wrote:
>
> I've never traded in this claim, so if a replacement judge is needed I'm willing to judge. UID=97
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:42 AM chrisran.bma e-mail < chrisran.bma@virgin.net mailto:chrisran.bma@virgin.net > wrote:
>
> > >
> > I am inclined to think this claim can be judged now that BP Statistical review 2019 has been published.
> >
> > Slight issue:
> >
> > First sentence
> >
> > "This claim will be true if before 2020, world oil production declines by at least 3% for 2 years in a row according the figures in the BP Statistical Review of World Energy http://www.bp.com/ (Normally published in June)."
> >
> > suggests both consecutive declines have to be before 2020.
> >
> > The last sentence seems to back this up with
> >
> > "Even if oil declines in 2019 and 2020 but not in 2018 this claim will be judged false."
> >
> > Only issue is the previous sentence saying
> >
> > "Note: the last year for which the judge will consider production figures are those for 2020."
> >
> > Which doesn't seem to agree: why wait for 2020 figures if they do not affect the claim?
> >
> > I suppose a possible interpretation might be that even though oil production was 2.4% higher in 2018 than 2017, the judge should wait for 2020 figures in case corrections to previous years figures make any difference. If that was the intention, should it have been explained? If not explained is it more likely a drafting error and if so is 2 out of 3 sentences good enough?
> >
> >
> > The largest decline was 2008 to 2009 with the last report indicating a 2% decline. Adjustment to figures over last 6 years indicate this has varied from 2% to 2.15%. The level of adjustments seems to indicate there is no realistic prospect of revisions to 2018 2.40% increase or 2008/9 decrease changing by as much as needed.
> >
> > I could see a point in waiting if some years were close to 3% decline but otherwise it seems fairly pointless to wait an extra two years for what looks like an error.
> >
> >
> > Data from 2014 and 2019 reports:
> >
> > Thousand barrels daily 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
> > Total World 77639 81054 82107 82593 82383 82955 81262 83296 84049 86204 86754
> >
> > Thousand barrels daily 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
> > Total World 83069 81410 83255 84009 86228 86647 88736 91547 91822 92502 94718
> >
> >
> > Not sure if the judge, Jim Bowery, is still around. We may need replacement judge. (Copy sent to judge's email as displayed in claim.)
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Chris Randles
> >
> > (crandles 7886)
> >
> >
> > >

source



All trademarks, copyrights, and messages on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Forum: Copyright (c) 2000-2001 Javien Inc All rights reserved. Distributed under the GPL