Ideosphere Forum

Re: fx-propose: Proposal: 'POIL30'

Author: chrisran.bma e-mail
Conversation: fx-propose: Proposal: 'POIL30' ( prev | next ) reply!
Topic: fx-propose ( prev | next )
In-Reply-To: chrisran.bma e-mail's post
Followed-Up-By: Michael Cowley's post
Date: Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:47 am
chrisran.bma e-mail
chrisran.bma e-mailRoland Postle
Michael Cowleychrisran.bma e-mail



So, any comments on whether the following is viable or if it would be preferable to provide greater certainty about judging by just using oil production being over 5% below the peak year?

Anyone willing to offer to be judge?

Regards

Chris

>
> This is a scaled claim that will pay (10*(peak year-2020)) capped at or between 0 and 100. The peak year is defined as year with highest worldwide annual total of oil production according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy.
>
> The claim should not be judged until one of the following four options occurs and then it should be judged.
>
> A. 1. There is a subsequent year with worldwide annual total of oil production being over 5% below the peak year, and 2. This is not the year following the peak year, and 3. This is not due to temporary freak circumstances, and 4. There is widespread agreement amongst experts that there will be further falls in worldwide annual total of oil production.
>
> or
>
> B. 1. There are four years of declines in worldwide annual total of oil production in a four or five consecutive year period, and 2. The end year of that period has worldwide total of oil production over 2% below the latest year before the period starts that is not affected by temporary freak circumstances, and 3. None of the years in the period are affected by temporary freak circumstances, and 4. There is widespread agreement amongst experts that there will be further falls in worldwide annual total of oil production.
>
> or
>
> C. There is a subsequent year with worldwide annual total of oil production being over 10% below the peak year, and 2. This is not the year following the peak year, and 3. This is not due to temporary freak circumstances. Experts expecting rises in oil production have no effect under this C clause.
>
> or
>
> D. 2030 or subsequent year has highest worldwide annual total oil production.
>
>
> The precise meaning of 'temporary freak circumstances' is at the judges discretion but should be expected to include things like natural disasters, terrorist action on oil production/refining or other facilities, wars that are significantly more widespread than previous years, pandemics, or government action like bans/rationing possibly taxes etc provided that the circumstances are expected to last 18 months or less and have highly significant impact on oil production.
>
> Anything approaching normal operation of the market like OPEC deciding to pump less because they want to drive the prices up should not count as temporary freak circumstances unless it is clearly in response to some other freak event.
>
> Temporary freak circumstances can turn out to last a little longer than 18 months without ceasing to be temporary. A maximum of 3 consecutive calendar (or whatever annual period BP Statistical Review of World Energy uses) years can be below 95% of the peak year due to temporary freak circumstances and not be used to cause the claim to be judged.
>
> The judge has discretion on how and when to decide the temporary freak circumstances have ceased to have impact and may shorten the maximum 3 consecutive calendar (or whatever annual period BP Statistical Review of World Energy uses) year period. The 3 consecutive calendar year period should not be extended to 4 or more years unless there is a completely separate temporary freak event.
>
> If the BP Statistical Review of World Energy ceases to be produced then the judge should add a statement indicating a replacement source that is preferably similarly authoritative.
>
> 'Widespread agreement amongst experts that there will be further falls in worldwide annual oil production totals' will depend on sources available at that time and the judge has discretion on how to interpret this.
>
> It is possible the claim will need to be kept open past the due date to see if a new peak is reached per D, or to see if oil production or expectations declines in order to satisfy A, B or C above or to see if circumstances remain temporary freak circumstances.
>



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