For example, Egypt and Libya, alone, had the potential to disrupt delivery of 5 percent of the global crude oil supply; however the short term flexibility of global consumers to curtail consumption is very low—the immediate price effect of such a loss in supply could be more than 25 percent. Measured against the September or October prices, that would be about a $20 dollar jump.
When refiners, airlines and others purchase contracts for future delivery, if the expected jump in prices is in the range of $20, traders on the other side of those contracts bear the risks of even higher prices and need a buffer to offset potential losses. Hence a $30 jump on a 90 or 180 day contract is hardly unreasonable.
Between the effects of increased demand and tightening global supplies, expected before the Egyptian rebellion, and continued concern that the democracy movement could spread to autocratic and mildly repressive regimes like Saudi Arabia, a price increase from $75 in September to $105 in April is quite reasonable.
Also, profiteering in the gasoline market appears equally remote. Prices have increased about $1.10 gallon since September to $3.86 in April, while the cost of crude oil has increased a bit more than $33 a barrel or 80 cents per gallon. When market conditions improve, such as during the summer driving season, refiners’ margins generally improve. Another 30 cents seems well within what could be expected, and there appears to be little room for speculators in the gasoline market to be taking an outsized slice.
Before readers pounce on refiners—refining, historically, is not a high profit business. If margins don’t increase when prices are strong, those folks can’t stay in business. It’s like hotel rates, seasonal fluctuations and unusual events are built into the business model.
All this has profound effect on U.S. growth. Economists expected that the economic recovery could withstand a gradual increase in gas prices to more than $3.50 by summer, but the sudden jump this winter and spring caused most forecasters, this one included, to scale back first quarter growth estimates from 3.3 percent to something in the range of 2.8 percent.
Add other festering problems such as the debt crisis in Europe, state governments accelerating layoffs, uncertainty imposed by the budget and debt ceiling melodramas in Congress, and business fears about the Administration’s penchant to scapegoat and regulate, most forecasters are expecting the Commerce Department to report Friday first quarter growth was closer to 2 percent. Already, new unemployment claims are on the rise again, and the recent improvement in the monthly jobs creation numbers may be short lived.
Americans could have it another way. U.S. oil consumption is about 15.3 million barrels a day, with imports supplying 9.5 million barrels a day and domestic production at 5.8 million barrels a day. Prudent emphasis on more fuel efficient vehicles—not just wiz bang electrics—could cut domestic fuel consumption by 2.5 million barrels a day, renewed development of economically viable oil reserves could increase domestic production by about 4 million barrels a day, and imports could be cut by one-half to two thirds.
While gas prices might still be high, the money Americans spend at the pump and on better vehicles would stay at home to create high paying jobs, and boost growth and living standards for all Americans.
More domestically produced oil would not add to environmental problems—those have to be managed whether oil is produced in the United States or imported. Indeed, greater reliance on domestic oil would be kinder to the environment, because U.S. policymakers are better able to require safe production methods at home than abroad.
Instead, seizing on public anger about rising gas prices, President Obama fails to take responsibility for his policies and relies on his best asset—his fine speaking voice—to troll for votes by villainizing oil companies and faceless speculators.
Such demagoguery imperils an already fragile American prosperity and debases the presidency. All politicians need to run for reelection but Presidents are elected to be statesmen and put the national interest above their own.
Mr. President, we are waiting.
Peter Morici is a professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, and former Chief Economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission.