I think the market has clearly shown that over the last couple years.
While the U.S. share of global upstream (that is, production) investment outpaced funds into Saudi Arabia and Russia by 10:1, the rest of the world outspent the U.S. on demand-side investment — places to put all those resources — by 15:1.
.............
I think that this is a key take away from the article.
What it means is that there is enough worldwide demand for oil to absorb US oil production increases without materially affecting the price of oil.
The EIA currently expects the USA to add 1 million barrels@ day in 2014 and 2015.But then the EIA foresees production flattening after that.
Will flattening USA oil production increases in 2017 and beyond pressure oil prices upwards? Beats me. But a nice thought for speculative drillers
I think the market has clearly shown that over the last couple years.
The author, whose background is in history and journalism, quotes a Goldman Sachs report. The author says we don't invest enough in energy intensive industries which, he says, is due to a "failure of ambition and foresight on the both public and private sides". Toward the end, we discover that both he a Goldman favor a (continued) ban on both oil and LNG exports. That's right, punish the O&G industry with lower prices because industry isn't consuming as much of their product as you wish. He forgets that this will cause lower E&P. Forget the author; he's a nanny-stater if not worse. The quotes from GS seem bad enough, but they may be selective, so let's review the full GS report, not the Business Insider (Democrat) spin on the topic.
There is no story here. U.S. industry is adapting to lower natural gas prices as any prudent business would. For example, new refineries are financed over twenty+ years, not on the basis of spot NG prices.
Let's keep the government out of the O&G industry to the greatest extent possible; and Business Insider off FR