Author: Ken Kittlitz Conversation: Re: fx-discuss: FX Claim pkol20 - Peak Oil < 2020 ( prev | next ) reply! Topic: fx-discuss ( prev | next ) In-Reply-To: chrisran.bma e-mail's post Date: Wed Jul 03, 2019 08:37 pm

Neal is now the judge!

-Ken

On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 4:04 PM chrisran.bma e-mail <chrisran.bma@virgin.net>
wrote:

> 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> 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