Talk:Price of oil

message: I would add information about price of biofuel and price of electricity. --HybridBoy 08:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about petroluem, not gasoline, biofuel, or electricity.  Snottywong 23:33, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: initial comments

message: The history section seems to be trying to use summary style without actually summarizing the articles. The reader shouldn't be forced to read another article to get an overview of less recent events in the history of oil prices. If the main template is used, a summary of the article linked to should generally follow. Is this just lack of development? Richard001 (talk) 07:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I would like to see any mention at all of the history up until the 1960s too...85.227.226.235 (talk) 17:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: History section

message: There has to be some mistake in this text, if you compare it with "oil reserves". Contradiction!!:
oil reserve says:
"Iran had the world's second largest reserves of conventional crude oil at 136 gigabarrels as of 2007, although it ranks third if Canadian reserves of non-conventional oil are included. This is roughly 10 percent of the world's total proven petroleum reserves. Iran is the fourth largest oil producer in the world and is OPEC's second-largest producer after Saudi Arabia. As of 2006 it was producing an estimated 3.8 million barrels per day (bbl/d), equal to 5 percent of global production.[22] At 2006 rates of production, Iran's oil reserves would last 98 years if no new oil was found."
this text says:
Particularly significant are Indonesia, which no longer exports oil, Mexico and Iran, where projected demand will exceed production in about 5 years, and Russia, which is growing rapidly.
Iran cannot exceed production in about 5 years if it has still oil reserves lasting for about 98 years.
85.3.174.127 (talk) 21:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iran 

message: Under Recent Price History - 
Paragraph Six - 
Last Sentence reads - 
"Prices continued to rise to a peak of $538555.544% on November 7, 2007 before starting to fall."
Obviously the number $538555.544% can't be correct.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.83.193.123 (talk) 04:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numeric Error 

message: Gas hits $3.50 around the country already. It's time to update the pictures, especially the one with Shell Gas Station, showing only $2.91/Gal. I say that with respect to all the wiki editors who go out & hunt for pics, it's just a friendly reminder, that's all. TheAsianGURU (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "The Asian Guru," which country might that be? Where I live (Hong Kong), US$8/gal is typical; the UK is looking at $10. DOR (HK) (talk) 04:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need new pictures. 

message: There's a huge overlap between this article and Oil price increases since 2003.  They share most of the same images, and the other article has newer gas station sign pictures.  We need some consolidation and merging. Also see Peak Oil.  --John Nagle (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Most of the details in the Recent price history section should be summarised or merged into Oil price increases since 2003.  This article shouldn't be about day-to-day changes in the price even if a new record price is being set. That information would be best provided on the main articles listed, with a short intro para on this one. - Shiftchange (talk) 06:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried shortening the recent price history to only mark dates when oil crossed specific landmark price thresholds, $80, $90, $100. There is plenty of detail, as you say in Oil price increases since 2003. This one probably still could shrink a little, but I made a start (I took out one picture--but the US centric stuff might not belong either). maxsch (talk) 17:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major overlap with [[Oil price increases since 2003]] 

message: I added this record so far: It further rose above $126 a barrel for the first time Friday, amid gas prices’ hike above an average $3.67 per gallon at the pump. ap.google.com , Gas jumps above $3.67, oil passes $126 on Venezuela concerns --Florentino floro (talk) 06:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, please specify where you are. $3.67/gal would be less than half the price we pay in Hong Kong! DOR (HK) (talk) 04:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Such prices are in the United States, which taxes gasoline 30 cents a gallon. The current average price for gasoline, petrol, at the pump is $3.94, for diesel $4. 59. These prices remain somewhat low at a barrel price of $130, i.e. a refiner buying input stock at that price would be running at a loss. Fred Talk 17:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: $ 126

message: I would like to say that the oil prices drops when we invent the new hybrid vehicles which uses solar and petrolem energis.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.20.39.66 (talk) 09:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  UDAYA.K 

message: Record since -  Oil prices on June 28, hit record of $142.99 at 1:58 p.m., the highest since 1983 and to $142.97, the highest intraday price since 1988, owing to a weak dollar, geopolitical unrest and global equities slump. bloomberg.com, Oil Rises Above $142 for First Time as Investors Spurn Stocksboston.com, Oil rises to trading, closing records on falling US dollar guardian.co.uk, Oil hits record near $143 on rising investor flows--Florentino floro (talk) 07:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: $ 142.99

message: I removed the following from the "Future" section since it does not belong there:
A difficult factor to isolate is the total volume of the futures markets themselves.  As there are many indirect owners of futures (401k plans, mutual funds, and even simple savings accounts are routinely invested in such things without the account holder being explicitly aware,) the knock-on effect of a downwardly spiraling economy could itself further devalue oil.  Similar factors corrected the run away that gold and silver experienced in the early 1980s, for example.
As with any speculation market, it is well within investors' ability to drive up the price of futures well out of proportion with the supplies and demands involved.  But there are two dangers that can quickly affect such transient spikes.  Demand can drop off, and supply can increase.  This was the case in 1998/1999 when the Asian market collapsed, reducing demand, and Iraq increased production by over 12%, increasing supply.  This caused the all-time low of $8.  
In the post-Sept 11th world, after an initial dip below $25 a barrel, oil prices started to rise. As it pertains to recent events, the demand side is slowing, though not appreciably enough.  The US Congress opened to panels to investigate the potential speculation fraud on Tuesday June 17.  On the same day, Saudi Arabian oil production increase by 200,000 barrels a day, the largest in its history was announced as a potential option.  This and other factors caused oil to drop for fourth day in a row, closing at $133.53.http://gaspricewatch.com/new/default_V3.asp
A weak dollar and Iran war talk caused the biggest single day increase ever. A rise of $11 in a single day took the price to $138.http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/06/news/economy/gas_prices/ Once again war games by and with Iran raised the price of oil to above $146.http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602099&sid=aXZmt3ZhPnp0&refer=energy Ironically enough, on July 16 2008, mounting concerns of spiralling oil prices and the effect on the economy helped plunge the oil by its biggest ever single day fall since 1991CNN International. July 16, 2008, 3-3:30am CET of $6.44 (at one point more than $10 on the same day). According to the AP, "an extremely volatile session" coupled with "fears that record fuel prices are spreading broad economic pain exacerbated the third big sell-off in just over a week."http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i5TtajgUpSm7KY5jf-lCJGHBB-tAD91UGQ080
I suggest to leave it out of the article entirely (they do not add much, if any, information), but if someone disagrees (s)he may add it to a more appropriate section.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 19:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Future" tidying-up 

message: I think the article should now focus on factors affecting the psychology of the market rather than present a report on prices. At the moment the article doesn't cover the short-term market forces like bad weather, industrial accidents, militant attacks on infrastructure and similiar events. Long term factors like consumer trends, taxation, technological developments and production matters should also be explained. - Shiftchange (talk) 05:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Market forces 

message: Now it seems that the price of oil is going downwards, it was ~80$ / barrel today. If you look here and the 1 year forecast, it has gone down for the last 3 months.
The current graphs are now misleading, not showing the latest trend on oil prices.128.214.205.4 (talk) 15:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The graphs are still misleading because they don't document the latest trend in oil-prices. The price of oil has gone down for the last 3 months. Currently it stands at ~67$ / barrel. Please check the link above. 212.16.103.22 (talk) 09:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced two of the charts so that they now show prices up to 2008 October 17. The other charts are beyond my ability or desire to update. The source used is http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_wco_k_w.htm . -84user (talk) 17:14, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important notice on current trend 

message: I noticed that reference 32, referencing an article on cnn money on may 30 2008 is broken, but when I wanted to edit it there was only this in the page: "{ { reflist | 2 } }". I think the correct link to the article should be: http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/30/news/economy/oil_cftc/index.htm
which is the only article published on that date on that subject. Someone can correct this or i could do it if someone could tell me how to fix the reference list. MrZap (talk) 13:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken links 

message: I have changed the wording in the speculation section. "Expert" is no longer there. Ed Wallace is not an "expert" on the economy or on oil. He is a journalist who writes reviews on new cars. 
:Wrong again. From his bio: "Ed Wallace is a recipient of the Gerald R. Loeb Award for business journalism, given by the G. and R. Loeb Foundation, and is a member of the American Historical Society."  NJGW (talk) 00:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't that section talking about "expert opinions"?  Kind of over the top to say that "in the opinions of experts, the opinion they write in opinion pieces is that..."  NJGW (talk) 00:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the section is talking about "expert opinions". Which is the problem because Ed Wallace is not an "expert". He is a commentator (journalist) offering his opinion in an opinion piece (which you changed to read "article"). Please do not post factually incorrect material in articles. Geogene (talk) 00:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What kind of expert are you looking for?  How about one that receives "business journalism's highest honor"?  How about one whose opinions are deemed important by BusinessWeek?  Do you have anything to say about Wallace besides that he is not someone you know?  NJGW (talk) 21:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We can keep that wording since  "commentator" and "pundit" bother you so much...even though that's what journalists are. Having received "journalism's highest award" does imply that he is a journalist, right? Not a geologist. Not an economist. But a paid commentator. Quoted in an opinion piece. What an "expert". Fine business. Geogene (talk) 21:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ed Wallace

message: I removed 3 paragraphs, called "Petroleum Politics", as a copyvio of http://usmerelations.blogspot.com/.--Environnement2100 (talk) 16:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio removal

message: The price of oil graph is now a year behind, and in the last year, the price has doubled.  See [:File:Brent Spot monthly.svg] for links to the raw data.  
It's not hard to make a graph, but mine, made with OpenOffice Calc, didn't match the look of this one.  --John Nagle (talk) 03:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The price plots need updating. See  for example, http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/crude-oil.aspx?timeframe=10y, and it is unlikey it is going up to 100, or even 70 anytime soon (see http://www.wsj.com/articles/oil-price-forecast-to-stay-below-60-through-next-year-1442937035 and also http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/business/energy-environment/oil-prices.html ).Malaiya (talk) 02:44, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Price graph needs an update 

message: The intro currently says "On 31 January 2011, the Brent price hit $100 a barrel for the first time since October 2008, on concerns about the political unrest in Egypt". I don't doub't that the jump in price that happened then had to do with that, but this wording makes it seem like the overall explanation for the upwards trends in oil prices we see is due to a series of unconnected single events, rather than an overall supply/demand issue. Instead of mentioning details like the effect of unrest on oil prices, the intro should mention some of the long-term price drivers mentioned further down in the article. Amaurea (talk) 10:02, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Short term changes vs. longer trends 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Price of oil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080601035046/http://money.cnn.com:80/2008/05/29/markets/oil_markets_investigation.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008052913 to http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/29/markets/oil_markets_investigation.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008052913
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140208045617/http://www.quandl.com:80/markets/global-commodity-markets/crude-oil-and-gasoline to http://www.quandl.com/markets/global-commodity-markets/crude-oil-and-gasoline
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online</span></span>07:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The cited publication  says peak oil price (in 2016 US dollars) was reached in 2011 and the move from 118.71 to 43.73 would be a decline of 275 percent. My calculator says this is minus 63 percent. Wakari07 (talk) 12:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Our world in data 

message: Hello, I propose to change the date format of the article to DMY, as this is the common format across the world (except in the United States). As this article is of international scope, it is logical to have an international date format instead of one commonly used in only one country. --Ita140188 (talk) 00:47, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date format 

message: Per --SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 19:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oil is now less than zero 

message: After rereading existing RS thoroughly and adding more references, removing some text, adding some, I removed the maintenance templates. I would like to suggest that future maintenance templates be more precise to facilitate clean-up. For example, perhaps the "essay-like" template could be added to the section it refers to. I think it is in the best interest of Wikipedia to have as few of these templates as possible for a short a time as possible. When one editor adds a number of templates at a time, it discourages other editors from attempting to do the clean up. In line templates are much more helpful. Thanks to all those generous volunteer Wikipedia editors.Oceanflynn (talk) 22:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Maintenance templates

message: I was under the impression we were using World oil market chronology from 2003 for detailed information. I have been contributing to that. Can't we remove a lot of the excess detail and put it in the other article?— Vchimpanzee •  talk • contributions •  17:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much detail