skip to main content
Close Icon We use cookies to improve your website experience.  To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy.  By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies.
Global Search Configuration
  • Correlation between oil price moves and consumer spending power has weakened
  • Energy sector is an important contributor to investment element of GDP
  • Energy Intensity has fallen markedly and is set to decline further

By David Ader, Informa Financial Intelligence Chief Market Strategist

The price of oil has pretty much doubled from a year ago, raising questions about whether the increase will be a hit to consumers and add to inflation pressures. This isn't so far-fetched. At one time, lower oil prices -- we really mean gas prices -- conformed to an uptick in consumer spending in the form of at-the-pump tax relief. The inverse held true; higher gas prices were an effective tax.

Alas, this perspective and the potential correlation has weakened, which is to say that lower or higher oil/gas prices have less impact on gross domestic product and, to a degree, on inflation. In short, there are some good reasons to be concerned about higher energy prices. A "tax" on the consumer shouldn't rank too high as a risk.

In a curious twist of fate, as the U.S. becomes more of a fuel producer, lower energy prices could have an adverse economic impact. The windfall to the consumer is gone and has been replaced by stress on the energy sector. Granted, the latter is not a big employer, but in terms of growth it was perhaps the single largest contributor to business investment in the GDP equation until the oil bust of 2014.

The main question here involves our use of energy. There is a concept called “Energy Intensity," which measures the amount of energy in British Thermal Units for each dollar of GDP. The measure, produced by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, has been in steep decline since the 1970s and, according to the EIA, will decline further in coming years. Here are some numbers: In 1974, we consumed about 10,000 BTUs for every dollar of GDP. That's in constant prices (adjusted for inflation). That figure was more or less steady from the 1950s to the 1970s. But things changed in the late 70s and that figure has been dropping ever since.

 

Energy Intensity

 

The latest data, from the end of 2014, showed that number had fallen to 3,880 BTUs. A few years ago, EIA projected usage would drop by almost half by 2040.  This wasn't just happening in the U.S. either. In July, the EIA noted that energy intensity had dropped 32 percent as a world average from 1990-2015, 32 percent in OECD countries and 40 percent in non-OECD countries.

 

US avg MPG

 

There are many reasons for this decline. First, the economies of the U.S. and Western Europe are far less based on manufacturing, which used energy rather more than economies based on services. Another reason is that we are more fuel efficient. Take cars. In 1990, the average car used 28 miles per gallon and light trucks burned 20.8 mpg. By 2015, those figures were 36.4 and 26.3, respectively, according to Bureau of Transportation statistics. There has been a particularly sharp ramping up in fuel efficiency in the last ten years. Recognizing the possibility of looser regulations under a Trump administration, the EPA did reaffirmed in December that the goal is for a 54.5 mpg target by 2025.

 

EIA All Motor vehicles

 

Also, we seem to be driving less. The EIA indicated that as of 2014, the average annual mileage of a vehicle had declined to 11,621 miles from more than 12,000 from about 1996 to 2006. Think about it: We have better fuel efficiency, and people are driving less. I'm tempted to suggest that more urban youth are riding bicycles around Brooklyn, and workers in general are moving back to cities, while aging baby boomers commute less as they wind down or fully retire.

david.ader@informa.com

This piece first appeared in Bloomberg View

Recommended Articles

  • IGM Credit, IGM FX and Rates

    The Context 08.03.20

    03 Aug 2020

    Read more from The Context and subscribe to have it delivered to your inbox each week!

    Topics Industry News

  • IGM Credit, IGM FX and Rates

    China Insight: Politburo Re-affirmed Bias in Favour of Less Dovish Policy

    By Tim Cheung 03 Aug 2020

    Xinhua News Agency reported the Politburo held a meeting on the economy on 30 July (Thursday). The CCP also held a meeting with non-CCP political parties and non-political representatives. President Xi chaired both meetings. Compared to the meeting held on 17 April, we note some changes in wording were made to the remarks on monetary and fiscal policies in the 30 July meeting. 30 July meeting (as per Xinhua News Agency): - "While requiring full implementation of macro policies, the meeting called for pursuing a more proactive and effective fiscal policy that delivers solid outcomes, and a more flexible and appropriate monetary policy that targets sound results, according to the meeting". 17 April Meeting (as per Xinhua News Agency): - "Monetary policies should be more flexible and balanced and instruments such as reserve requirement ratio cuts, interest rate reductions and reloans should be fully leveraged to ensure reasonable and sufficient liquidity and a lower interest rate in the loan market, the meeting said, stressing the need to channel capital into the real economy, especially medium-sized, small and micro enterprises".

    Topics Industry News

  • IGM Credit, IGM FX and Rates

    The Context 07.27.20

    27 Jul 2020

    Read more from The Context and subscribe to have it delivered to your inbox each week!

    Topics Industry News

;

Any questions? Speak to a specialist

Would you like to request sample data or analysis from Informa Financial Intelligence? 

See how our tailored solutions can help you gain a competitive advantage: