3 ms·
This looks really flawed - it seems to have taken 2020 as a "normal year" and not accounted for the lockdowns and economic shock of COVID-19. Sure there is a re
by sgt101 4y ago
This looks really flawed - it seems to have taken 2020 as a "normal year" and not accounted for the lockdowns and economic shock of COVID-19. Sure there is a reduction in UK oil consumption from 20xx -> 2020 but to then take the rise after 2020 back to 2019 levels in 2022 as predictive is really silly.
- ianai 4y agoBut isn’t 2020 important to include because it shows a variance in observations outside of the rest of the sample? Ie it’s important to know how things react “in reverse”. But totally need to acknowledge exogenous restraints for that year.
- sgt101 4y agoSure - if you treat it that way! I don't think that the authors do - instead they claim that brexit is linked to increase oil use which is really really odd.