Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

How the Energy Information Administration guestimates keep oil prices subdued

By Nicholas Cunningham - posted Friday, 8 September 2017


The EIA has once again undercut its previous estimates for US oil production, offering further evidence that the US shale industry is not producing as much as everyone thinks.

The monthly EIA oil production figures tend to be more accurate than the weekly estimates, although they are published on several months after the fact. The EIA just released the latest monthly oil production figures for June, for example. Meanwhile, the agency releases production figures on a weekly basis that are only a week old – the latest figures run up right through August.

The weekly figures are more like guestimates though, less solid, but the best we can do in nearly real-time. It is not surprising that they are subsequently revised as time passes and the agency gets more accurate data.

Advertisement

But the problem is that for several months now, the monthly and the weekly data have diverged by non-trivial amounts. The weekly figures have been much higher than what the monthly data reveal only later. And remember, it is the monthly data that tends to be more accurate.

Let's take a look. A month ago, I wrote about how the EIA's monthly data for May put US oil production at 9.169 million barrels per day (mb/d). But back in May, the EIA's weekly figures told a different story. The agency thought at the time that the US was producing nearly 200,000 bpd more than turned out to be the case. Here were the weekly estimates at the time:

  • May 5: 9.314 mb/d
  • May 12: 9.305 mb/d
  • May 19: 9.320 mb/d
  • May 26: 9.342 mb/d

But two months later, the EIA published its final estimate for May, and put the figure at 9.169 mb/d. So, as it turns out, the US was producing much less in May than we thought at the time.

 

Now, the EIA has once again skewered its own weekly estimates. On August 31, it released monthly figures for June, and the discrepancy is even larger than the month before. The EIA says oil production in the US actually declined in June, falling by 73,000 bpd to just 9.097 mb/d. Compare that to what the agency thought at the time with its weekly estimates:

Advertisement
  • June 2: 9.318 mb/d
  • June 9: 9.330 mb/d
  • June 16: 9.350 mb/d
  • June 23: 9.250 mb/d
  • June 30: 9.338 mb/d
  • If those figures were correct, the US would have averaged something like 9.317 mb/d for June. But the EIA now says that data was wrong, and in reality the figure should have been 9.097. In other words, in June, the US produced 220,000 bpd less than we thought at the time.

  • IMG URL: http://cdn.oilprice.com//images/tinymce/Nuck.jpg

    This may seem like nitpicking, but it's not exactly a tiny number. If that gap were to persist for the full-year, it's nearly equivalent to half of what Saudi Arabia promised to cut as part of the OPEC deal, or substantially more than what the IEA expects Canada to add in new supplies this year.

    More importantly, if the US is actually producing much less than the market thinks, there is a much stronger bullish case for oil than conventional wisdom dictates. After all, there are massive shale production gains from the US baked into oil price forecasts. For example, the EIA sees US oil production surging from 9.3 mb/d this year to 9.9 mb/d in 2018, a gain of 600,000 bpd.

    But the problem is that not only will it be difficult to reach that 9.9 mb/d, but it now looks like an uphill battle for the US to reach that 9.3 mb/d figure in 2017. For the first six months of this year, the US only averaged 9.071 mb/d. It will have to seriously ramp up production in order to reach that 9.3 mb/d estimate for the full-year. In reality, that looks very unlikely.

    That means that ramping up to 9.9 mb/d next year would also appear out of reach, particularly since the shale industry seemed to stall out this summer. Production actually fell from May to June; the rig count has plateaued; some shale companies are already reporting some problems; the lingering effects of Hurricane Harvey will likely impact shale growth rates for months to come (although refinery outages are bearish in the near-term); and sub-$50 WTI prices will keep shale companies from recklessly spending more than they already are.

    In short, the US shale industry is on track to disappoint, which would mean there is a lot of upside risk to oil prices.

    1. Pages:
    2. 1
    3. 2
    4. All

    This article was first published on OilPrice.com.



    Discuss in our Forums

    See what other readers are saying about this article!

    Click here to read & post comments.

    4 posts so far.

    Share this:
    reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

    About the Author

    Nicholas writes for OilPrice.com.

    Other articles by this Author

    All articles by Nicholas Cunningham

    Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

    Article Tools
    Comment 4 comments
    Print Printable version
    Subscribe Subscribe
    Email Email a friend
    Advertisement

    About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy