The Big Picture Update on Q2 2008, Part 2

June 25, 2008 at 7:05 am
Contributed by: Chris

Folks,

Several updates for you here. First, my column this week for Energy and Capital, which is the final part of my update on the big picture for the second quarter of the year.

After that, some recent media updates. I have lots of media stuff going on related to the book, so stay tuned for more.

Feel free to send me your feedback; I love hearing from my readers.

–C

The Big Picture on Q2 2008, Part 2

Commodities and Renewables Charge While Market Tanks

2008-06-25
By Chris Nelder

In part 1 of this series, we reviewed the trends in financials, fossil fuels and electricity. This week, we take a look at renewables, food and fertilizer.

Renewable Energy

The picture for renewable energy just keeps getting better, as more of the world begins to realize that we are having a real problem maintaining our traditional energy supplies. I have no doubt now that a big revolution in energy has begun. Mark my words: This is the time to go long on renewable energy, for the long term.

Consider this chart of a few of my favorite renewable stocks against the S&P 500:

fslr-wnd-ora-s%26p-Q2-2008.jpg

After being beaten down harshly in the first quarter, along with just about everything else, renewable energy shares bounced up like spring flowers, handily beating the indexes by 20% or better.

Meanwhile, the chatter about controlling carbon emissions has only gotten louder, particularly as bad weather hits everywhere (which we’ll get to in a moment). I expect this trend to continue, and would not be at all surprised to see some sort of binding legislation passed within the next year.

As I have detailed in my book, I favor a carbon tax over cap-and-trade schemes, for a variety of reasons, but I would be happy to see any sort of binding controls established. When that happens, you will definitely want to be holding some solid, reputable renewable energy companies in your portfolio, because it’s going to put new fire under the whole sector, even as it puts the hurts on oil and coal.

Agriculture

Food production has come about even with energy as the world’s top concern since my review of the first quarter. Riots, hoarding, and intermittent shortages became more common, and everyone from the UN to the Saudis put it on the front burner.

My observation was borne out in an unexpectedly harsh way:

Not only are food and energy closely interrelated, but weather is right in the mix too. The increasing use of fossil fuels contributes to global warming, which reduces food production, as was the case with the Australian wheat harvest. At the same time, weather impacts our ability to produce energy…and back around the wheel we go.

Flooding in the Midwest this spring has ruined an estimate 5 million acres of land, and harvests have been delayed because the fields were too wet to work. While parts of the West like California had the driest spring on record, parts of southern Indiana, Illinois and Missouri have endured the wettest spring on record. (Inversely, China’s agriculture ministry instructed wheat and rice farmers in southern China a few weeks ago to harvest as much of their crop as possible before another wave of rains arrived.)

With fields too wet to sow corn, many farmers opted to plant soy this year instead of corn. The corn harvest this year is expected to be 10% lower than last year, and soybean plantings are running about 16% behind last year.

Consequently, corn shot from $5.82 at the end of Q1 to a record $7.92 last week. The spike in corn prices was due to the torrential rains that soaked the Midwest starting in late May, and in a mere two and a half weeks, corn prices went up 28%.

Ethanol production is expected to increase 25% over last year, and consume about 4 billion bushels of corn out of the 86 billion that will be sown this year. In the face of record corn prices, the cattle and poultry industries have been lobbying the EPA to cut the nation’s ethanol production mandate in half.

They’re not the only ones. Policymakers are realizing that corn is a very inefficient way of trying to produce biofuel, and might not be worth it. (That has been my position on corn ethanol since the beginning.) The corn ethanol plays have suffered the fallout:

vse-avr-peix-adm-Q2-2008.jpg

The one bit of good news for grains is the worldwide wheat harvest, which is expected to be about 8% higher this year than last. The expectation brought the price of wheat down from a record $13.50 per bushel on Feb. 27 to $8.70 today, about where it started the year. Still, wheat remains about 50% higher than it was a year ago, and the harvest below average levels.

The big picture for agriculture is clear enough: demand is higher than ever, and supply is faltering. (Reminds you of anything?)

The flooding of the Mississippi had another unexpected consequence: The levee breaks shut down transport on the river, stranding 100 barges. Mississippi barges are the primary mode of transport to get grain from the Midwest to export terminals in the Gulf of Mexico. Grain giant Cargill alone had 200,000 bushels of corn sitting on the dock, unable to get a barge.

If you took my recommendations on fertilizer at the beginning of Q2, you are smiling now:

mos-pot-feed-Q2-2008.jpg

FEED has clearly sold off a speculative bubble, so I wouldn’t touch that one now (and I hope you got out with some nice gains, as I did). But Mosaic and Potash Corp. are still good bets to hold, because I don’t see any reason to think the food supply situation is going to radically improve any time soon. In fact, this looks like a nice little buying opportunity.

As one would expect for a diversified play, the more general agriculture ETFs I suggested have performed more modestly than the fertilizer plays, but who would complain about a 10-30% gain in a quarter, especially when the S&P actually fell a few percent?

gsg-jja-jjg-dba-dbc-Q2-2008..jpg

I remain bullish on the ag ETFs, at least until we get a significant change in the supply and demand balance.

Metals

The metals group I suggested hasn’t done quite as well, but if you picked the better stocks over the ETFs, you made out alright:

bhp-rio-rtp-dbs-jjc-Q2-2008.jpg

My read of the metals group is that it’s probably ripe for a recovery, as the last couple of weeks are showing. Considering that the building boom is still going strong in Asia and the Middle East, and that shortages of basic building materials like iron are still happening regularly, I think this is a good time to jump into metals if you’re not in already.

On the whole, as bad as the news has been in energy, agriculture, finance, and the economy in general for the past quarter, I have to say I saw it all coming. I banked on it, and I’m still banking on it.

With an economy on the ropes, the financial sector going down in flames, food prices skyrocketing, oil prices causing widespread inflation and the Fed helpless to do anything about it, a lot of investors will end this year with a lot less money than they started it.

But not us. In fact, we expect to turn some nice gains, by reading the signs rightly and playing them smartly.

Gains like the ones you’ll make from our energy picks, when you sign up for the $20 Trillion Report.

Until next time,

Chris

Profit from the Peak featured on TheStreet.com

June 25, 2008 at 7:00 am
Contributed by:

My book was featured on TheStreet.com on Tuesday, along with a short article I wrote for them about the facts of peak oil, and how most of the media are still getting it wrong! Here it is.

–C


How to Profit From the ‘End of Oil’

Chris Nelder

06/24/08 - 02:18 PM EDT

If recent pronouncements about energy policy by the presidential candidates are any indication, America has a long way to go in understanding where we are, and where we’re heading.


Senator McCain and President Bush have both recently changed their minds about opening ANWR and the continental offshore to new drilling. McCain also wants to build 100 new nuclear reactors, and make a big push for so-called “clean coal.”


Senator Obama opposes drilling in areas where it is now prohibited and has dismissed McCain’s call for a summertime “gas tax holiday,” but supports a windfall profits tax for the oil industry and favors massive investment in renewable energy.


Meanwhile, the world waits with bated breath to see if the latest announcement on OPEC oil production will take down oil prices, even though the market responded to the last several production increases by bidding up oil further still.


A fine example of this was the emergency summit meeting convened unilaterally by Saudi Arabia on Sunday to try to assuage the oil markets. Many had hoped for a 500,000 barrel per day (bpd) increase. In fact, we got a promise for another 200,000 bpd of production — that’s an increase of 0.2%, yes, one-fifth of one percent. But that wouldn’t even make up for the loss last week of 320,000 bpd of Nigerian production due to bold militant attacks on a Shell RDS.Aoffshore platform and a Chevron CVX pipeline network. Consequently, the price of oil rose another one percent on Monday.


It seems as though hardly anyone understands the facts about oil, and about energy in general. The prevailing debate suggests that most people think the perceived problems and their solutions are essentially political, and that we could make our energy problems go away and jump back in our Hummers if only we put the right policies into place, or jawboned the right suppliers.


Nothing could be further from the truth.

Simple Math, Simple Answers


Once one understands the most current data and their trends, all of these questions are easy enough to answer.


Are we at the peak of global oil production? Probably, yes, but the right answer is, “We’re close enough that we need to do something about it, pronto.”


Drill offshore and ANWR as soon as possible? Bad idea. I say this not for environmental reasons, but simply from an investing perspective. It won’t help very much or for very long, it will take decades to come to market, and it will only put us farther out on the limb of fossil fuel dependency. It makes far more financial sense to burn somebody else’s oil for as long as possible, and save some of our own for a rainy day, when it will be in much greater demand and much more valuable. Judging from the gathering storm clouds of unstoppable oil prices and declining global oil exports, that rainy day is most certainly coming.


A hundred new nuclear reactors? Never going to happen. We’re going to be lucky to replace the existing ones, many of which are nearing the ends of their planned life spans.


“Clean” coal? Commercially, doesn’t exist yet, and probably won’t exist in any significant measure for several decades.


A windfall tax on Big Oil? Dumb, because big energy companies like BP BP and Chevron need that capital to continue investing billions in the energy technologies of the future.


A mandated production of biofuels in the midst of an oil-induced global spike in food prices? Painfully dumb, but that pain is mainly being felt in the Third World.


A gas tax holiday? So dumb that it’s an insult to our intelligence.


Obama’s call for a complete overhaul of our national energy policy (if you could even call it that)? Now we’re talking. I don’t know that he could or would pull it off, but it’s definitely the right idea.


Crisis and Opportunity


I believe the peak of oil is the most serious crisis the world has ever faced. And it’s already happening.


But the flip side of crisis is opportunity, so it is also the greatest investment event opportunity the world has ever seen.

My book (co-written by Brian Hicks), Profit from the Peak: The End of Oil and the Greatest Investment Event of the Century, is a careful study of all major forms of energy — oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, all renewables, efficiency, the whole lot — their potentials and peaking profiles, and their investing angles. It’s packed with data and charts, but explained in layman terms, in the hope that anyone can come away from it equipped to understand the path ahead, and to know the right turns from the wrong ones.


My research points to the peak of oil right about now (2008 to 2010), peak natural gas around 2010 to 2020, peak coal around 2020 and peak nuclear by roughly 2025. All of the sources are public information, yet few seem to have caught on that we’re really looking at peak energy within the next 15 years.


While most of the world waits for prices to increase to the point where the inevitable changes are forced upon us by the market, the smart money is already hard at work on the solutions of the future.


Solutions Abound


In the book, I cover natural gas companies like Southwestern Energy SWN, coal companies like Arch Coal ACI, solar companies like First Solar FSLR, battery and fuel cell plays like Energy Conversion Devices ENER and wind turbine manufacturers like Vestas Wind Systems. All of their stocks are up 100% or more over the last year.


Emerging renewable energy technologies like geothermal, wave and tidal power, which I also explore in depth, are the next wave of stocks set to double and triple.


I can’t say whether the solutions will come soon enough, and big enough, to save us from pain and hardship. I can’t say whether the majority of Americans will still be driving around solo in their cars 20 years from now. But I can say with great confidence that those who do come forth with the right solutions at the right time are going to become incredibly wealthy, while enjoying the satisfaction of knowing that their work is crucially needed.


There is a reason why big oil companies like Chevron, BP and Total TOT have now admitted that the era of cheap oil is over. No, it’s not because they’re trying to bend you over a barrel, but because it’s the truth, and they need to get out in front of the issue after being behind it for far too long.


No conspiratorial theories are needed to explain why oil prices keep going up, and Congressional probes in search of manipulative speculation in the oil futures market are a waste of time.


It’s all in the data. The depletion of the world’s biggest and best oil fields, now well into their twilight years, is relentless. The world now struggles against a backdrop of a roughly 5% per year decline in oil production in order to manage any net increase at all. As we reach the end of the plateau at the peak — probably within the next two years — global oil production will enter an era of relentless and terminal decline.


What can be done now — indeed, what must be done — is a very long list, including:


  • Improve the efficiency of absolutely everything, from homes to appliances to cars.


  • Switch transport from roads to electrically powered rail.


  • Transform our entire infrastructure from one that runs on liquid fuels to one that runs on electricity.

  • Deploy renewable energy in any place where it works well, like solar in the Southwest, wind in the Midwest, marine energy on the coasts, and “universal geothermal” everywhere.


  • Relocalize our economies from top to bottom, including local food production and restoring our country’s manufacturing base.


  • And yes, squeeze every last drop we can get out of oil and gas fields.


  • My book is a warning, a guide, a reference, and ultimately a call to action (and hope). We have already squandered the 30 years we needed to adapt to the new energy regime and execute a nice “soft landing.” Our options now are much more limited, and we must pursue them immediately and vigorously.


    There is no time left to lose, but there is plenty of time left to profit, and we hope, to prosper.

    Washington Post web chat

    June 25, 2008 at 7:00 am
    Contributed by: Chris

    I hosted a web chat on Monday at the Washington Post, along with my co-author Brian Hicks, to answer questions about energy. For those who are interested, here is the transcript.

    –C


    Transcript: Washington Post web chat with Chris Nelder and Brian Hicks, authors of Profit from the Peak


    Books: ‘Profit From the Peak’
    Authors Discuss Peak Oil, Energy Markets, Alternative Fuels and Recent Offshore Drilling Proposals

    Brian Hicks and Chris Nelder
    Authors, “Profit From the Peak: The End of Oil and the Greatest Investment Event of the Century”
    Monday, June 23, 2008; 1:00 PM

    Brian Hicks and Chris Nelder, authors of " Profit From the Peak: The End of Oil and the Greatest Investment Event of the Century" were online Monday, June 23 at 1 p.m. ET to discuss energy markets, alternative fuels, the future of gas prices and proposals for oil and gas exploration off U.S. coasts.

    The transcript follows.

    Hicks worked for Agora Publishing, one of the largest financial newsletter publishers in the world, for ten years before helping to found Angel Publishing. In addition to being the managing editor of Energy and Capital and The $20 Trillion Report, Hicks writes a weekly column for Wealth Daily.

    Nelder is a self-taught energy expert who has intensively studied peak oil for five years, and written hundreds of articles on peak oil and energy in general for Energy and Capital and other publications.

    ____________________

    Munich, Germany: When I’d first heard of the concept of "peak oil" I’d read that the Saudis were being cautious about trying to increase their capacity from 12.5 million barrels per day to 15 million, because they didn’t want to damage the supporting bedrock around the oil fields by over-pressurizing. As the oil fields in the Middle East get older, isn’t it going to get more challenging to retrieve the remaining oil?

    Chris Nelder: Yes, it will. I am very skeptical that the Saudis will ever produce more than 12 mbpd, but they keep their data and field production details very close to the chest, so it’s hard to know.

    _______________________

    Washington: I’ve noticed a recent drop in demand; how far down could it go? Also, is Obama right — can we drill our way out of this? Thanks.

    Chris Nelder: No, we cannot drill our way out of this. The U.S. imports about 14 million barrels per day (mbpd) of oil and products and produces about 7 mbpd. There is no way that the U.S. could add another 14 mbpd of domestic production. As to how far demand could go, that’s really a question of how far our economy could fall…and your guess is as good as mine.

    _______________________

    Harrisburg, Pa.: What is blocking there being a major corporation in alternative energy? Many of these technologies have been around for decades, and the economics always has been the same — high startup costs but long-term savings. What has no large investor gone fot the long-term returns, like Henry Ford did a century ago?

    Chris Nelder: Long term investors are going for the long term! Legendary oil investor T. Boone Pickens is a good example…he’s investing billions in wind and water.

    _______________________

    Washington: Do you see any significance to a legal advisor to Condi Rice endorsing the Law of the Sea treaty in today’s New York Times? Could it be that even they want a shot at Arctic oil?

    washingtonpost.com: Treaty on Ice (New York Times, June 23)

    Chris Nelder: I have no doubt that they want a shot at Arctic oil. However, from what research I have read, it’s not a terribly promising area, and tends to be gas-prone. When you drill a dry well that cost over $2 billion to drill, it really stifles further investment.

    "Some believe that the oil industry didn’t have the capabilities to explore for oil in the Arctic Ocean until recently, but back in the early 1980s a huge structure about 65 miles northwest of the Prudhoe Bay field, in the Arctic Ocean, was drilled. In December 1983 the structure was breached only to discover it was filled with salt water, the infamous $2 billion Mukluk dry hole."

    See http://www.aspo-usa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=378&Itemid=91

    _______________________

    Knoxville, Tenn.: Is oil produced in the United States from public land and offshore to remain in the United States, or is it destined for the highest-priced market, forign or domestic? Is oil from public lands in Alaska sold to the Asian markets, where profits are higher? Will the cost of oil exploration and drilling that produces no oil be passed on to the consumers with higher prices?

    Chris Nelder: Oil is a globally traded commodity, and generally sells to the highest bidder, although transportation costs favor the most local markets. So oil produced in the U.S. could be sold to any foreign buyer as easily as it could be sold to a domestic buyer. And yes, oil company costs including drilling all get priced in to the cost of a barrel, eventually.

    _______________________

    Linthicum, Md.: Thanks for taking my question. From what I understand, once the shale oil industry kicks in it can provide an almost unlimited source of oil at less than $50 per barrel. Why haven’t we heard more about this? Thanks.

    Chris Nelder: At this point, there are no commercial oil shale operations. There are many technical issues yet to be resolved. If any such operations suceed, they may be able to deliver oil for a very long time, but it will probably be just a trickle in terms of flow rate.

    Brian Hicks: The oil industry has known about oil shale for decades. But the technology… and more importantly the price of oil hasn’t been there to support developing it.

    But even with oil trading for $135+ a barrel, going after shale oil will be time-consuming because it doesn’t gush out of the ground like a conventional oil well we’re used to.

    So if we’re looking for a cure to our current oil crisis, shale isn’t it. It’s a band-aid.

    _______________________

    Washington: Any comments on John McCain’s proposal to give a $300 million prize for a new improved car battery? Are we going to hear more credible ideas from our presidential candiates, such as investing in rail and public transporation? By the way, a new 2008 Toyota Corolla gets 35 miles per gallon, while a 1997 Toyota Corolla used to get 42 miles per gallon.

    Chris Nelder: I support all investment into R&D on batteries. It’s a crucial part of the picture. As for investing in rail and transportation, that is #2 on my list of recommendations, after efficiency gains. I can only hope that our leadership will take up both objectives with full support.

    _______________________

    Bethesda, Md.: Will offshore drilling solve the current crisis?

    Chris Nelder: There is no way it can. My guess (we won’t know until we drill it) is that the continental offshore would never produce more than 2 mbpd, maybe a little more. Compare that to the 14 mbpd we import…

    _______________________

    Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: Your book was published by Wiley, is that right? Why them? Is it more like a typical Wiley handbook (science, engineering)? I’m a registered electrical engineer (electric power and controls) and many of my solid (not popular puff stuff) texts were published by them. Thus, will we see hard numbers, data and charts in your work, or the usual hand-waving, emotion-laden treatment of the typical general-purpose author? You can see my bias. Thanks much.

    Brian Hicks: Wiley also has a financial/investment publishing division. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, they’re the largest financial book publisher in the world.

    In the summer of 2006, Wiley approached us about doing a book on Peak Oil and its ramifications to the individual investor.

    I haven’t counted the number of charts and graphs in our book… but I would venture to guess it’s over 50. I consider our book to be academic… but not so academic that it’s intimidating to the average investor. It’s an easy read.

    Chris Nelder: I absolutely loaded the book with hard data, lots of references, and about 57 charts if memory serves. Those who love hard data will be satisfied with the book. It has received excellent reviews from geologists who really know the data, such as Colin Campbell and Jean Laherrere.

    _______________________

    San Diego: On stocks: I believe energy stock prices (oil and solar) are at their near-highs. Why might this not be true?

    Brian Hicks: I think we could be close to a correction in oil and gas. In fact, I’m hoping for it because I think both commodities (and the underlying stocks) have come too far too fast. I would be looking to buy any dips… because this energy crisis isn’t going to end anytime soon. If the IEA is correct (and I think they are)… that we have to invest at least $20 trillion to advert a crisis, the wealth that’ll be created will be life-altering.

    This is the investment event of the century… and I’m looking to hold my oil and gas positions for several more years.

    Chris Nelder: I am not as optimistic as Brian about significant corrections any time soon in the energy markets. There will be some short ones but I expect the long term trends of rising prices to hold. I base my expectations simply on the supply and demand outlook. However, if we should experience a sudden or sharp loss of demand, we could get those corrections.

    My advice is to pick good stocks in energy, buy them on the dips, and hold ‘em hold ‘em hold ‘em!

    _______________________

    Winchester, Va.: I enjoyed reading your book. In it there are investment discussions regarding individual stocks in the various energy sectors (i.e., oil, biofuels, solar, etc.). Are there funds that provide broad exposure to alternative energy investments (that include several sectors and a combination of large-cap, mid-cap and perhaps small-cap companies) that you recommend? Thank you.

    Brian Hicks: Yes, there are several… especially in the form of ETFs. There’s a Market Vectors Global Alternative Energy ETF (GEX) that will give you broad exposure to the global alternative energy infrastructure including wind, geothermal, solar, etc.

    There are also renewable energy specific ETFs that focus exclusively on solar and most recently wind, which you can find under the symbol FAN.

    _______________________

    Washington: What is more important in the peak oil world, inner-city land that is less reliant on cars and more reliant on group transport and walking, or agricultural land, with its easy access to growing food for yourself and others?

    Chris Nelder: That’s an excellent question! But I think the question isn’t really which is best, but which options you actually have.

    Personally, I would choose a rural agricultural option over an inner city one, at least until the necessary public transportation infrastructure is a little more in place.

    _______________________

    Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: Please comment on "energy density" and why it, coupled with unregulated prices for energy equivalents, will determine in the future which energy sources (by type) actively will be developed and which will wither on the vine. There’s only one planet, an exploding human population, and a finite resource base. The unverse works on numbers, not handwaving. Something has to give. Thanks much.

    Chris Nelder: I agree that something has to give, but I’m not sure that energy density is really the operative factor. The world is beholden to a liquid fuels regime, so any energy source that can be converted into a liquid fuel is going to be developed asap, particularly natural gas. But if/when we succeed in developing a larger infrastructure that runs on electricity, then we will see a real explosion of renewables. I hope that answers your question!

    _______________________

    Oak Hill, Va.: The lack of decisions to support domestic exploration or decisions to veto proposals to open domestic sources such as ANWR ten years ago are reasons we are more dependent on foreign sources. Members of Congress wrap themselves in votes to stop filling the stratecic petroleum reserve (less than 100,000 barrels per day) because it would impact the market but bring on one million barrels of oil from ANWR would not. I’m sure that makes perfect sense in Congress, but not on the world petroleum markets.

    Foreign oil dependence (not all from the Middle East) has increased in the past 30 years because of shortsighted, "re-elect me" decison. Now people are saying we can’t reduce imports. Baloney. We can become more secure, but "independence" from foreign oil is neither needed nor prudent. Every barrel found domesticly sends a message, albeit somewhat psychological, that we are getting serious.

    Is petroleum a finite resource? Yes, but as prices rise, if restrictions are lifted, petroleum will be found! You can take that to the bank. Finally, the doubling of alternative fuel production in the next decade barely will keep up with increasing world demand. Alternatives are part of the energy mix, but so is more petroleum.

    Chris Nelder: What you say is basically true, but there is a huge gap between the 14 mbpd we import and the perhaps 2-3 mbpd we could still produce from domestic sources.

    _______________________

    Leesburg, Va.: Given the Hirsch Report, "Twilight in the Desert," Sadad al-Huseini, etc., what scenarios do you forecast (deep recession, depression, collapse) and for how long? What human settlement patterns, agricultural methods and technological shifts do you expect will bring us out of the morass?

    Chris Nelder: Unfortunately it would take about another whole book to answer that question! My guess is that we will experience about a 30- or 40-year global recession, as we try to fill the gap of declining fossil fuels. Over that time, I expect a renaissance in subsistence farming and self-sufficiency. But I don’t think anybody could say, certainly not me, whether the 22nd Century will look more like an advanced eco-topia, or more like the 17th Century…

    _______________________

    Washington: I’m reading some of your earlier responses and trying to figure out why you keep saying an additional 14 million barrels per day is necessary to end the current energy crisis. Why is it necessary to replace all imported oil with domestic resources? Are you confusing the goal of ending the energy crisis with the concept of eliminating the use of foreign oil? It would seem to me to be significant if domestic production increased by a million or two barrels per day, and that prices would fall dramatically as a result. Perhaps you have market data to the contrary, or maybe you are defining the "crisis" in a way that I am not understanding. Please explain.

    Chris Nelder: If additional domestic production succeeded in bringing prices down, that would only stimulate further usage. This is a classic problem known as the Jevons Paradox.

    The only way we can succeed in meeting our domestic demand is by severely curtailing it until it fits within our domestic supply budget. There is no way we can fill a 14 mbpd gap with additional domestic supply! The U.S. has been on a 40-YEAR decline in domestic oil production and we aren’t going to significantly change that.

    _______________________

    Arlington, Va.: Thanks for your informative insights. Can you explain the issue of leases? I have heard that oil companies have purchased leases to explore/drill oil in the U.S., but have not drilled on all of them. Could the companies be required to explore and drill in areas where they already own leases before they are permitted to purchases additional leases? I would not like to see drilling in ANWR, but if it was permitted, would leases have to be sold? Thanks in advance for your answer!

    Brian Hicks: When a "patch" becomes hot, one of the first things you’ll see is a land grab by energy companies via leases. This recently occurred in the Bakken formation in MT and ND… and most recently in the Marcellus formation in Western PA, NY, etc.

    Companies will acquire leases to land in effort to 1) stake their claim to a potential production bonanza; and/or 2) sell the lease to a higher bidder in the future.

    _______________________

    Westcliffe, Colo.: T. Boone Pickens can afford to invest billions — he’s not getting any younger, and life is to the swift and the forsightful, not to the retired and complacent.

    Brian Hicks: I think Boone believes he’ll live to 125. I’ve met Boone… he’s a machine!

    _______________________

    Phoenix: How much is the current high price of crude oil affected by the relative abundance of heavy, sulphurous oil vs. the less readily available, lighter, "sweeter" oil, such as WTI? Also, to what extent are gasoline prices in the U.S. exacerbated by the shortage of refineries to process the heavier types of oil?

    Chris Nelder: Different grades of crude are sold in various places for various prices. Heavy sour trades at a discount to light sweet, but the tightness of the light sweet market and its high price tends drags the price of heavy sour up along with it. At this point, the independent heavy sour crude refiners in the U.S., like Valero (VLO) and Tesoro (TSO), have seen their margins collapse in the face of much higher imports of finished gasoline, so they have been unable to pass on the higher cost of their crude feedstock to the consumer. As a result, they are running well below capacity right now. So it’s not just about the availability and price of the crude; it’s also about the ability to keep selling products like gasoline when high prices are killing demand.

    _______________________

    Long Beach, Calif.: Where is the collusion between big auto and big oil? It’s ridiculous when India is rolling out compressed-air cars (they hit the U.S. in 2010, see this Web site) and the White House is talking about hydrogen cars. Hydrogen guarantees another decade of gas guzzlers at least! The laws of supply and demand are broken here. Why are we still driving gas guzzlers, and why isn’t the government pushing comopressed air if India of all places can get it done now?!

    Chris Nelder: I think you answered your own question!

    Hydrogen cars are a bad joke and have only delayed crucially important changes in our existing energy regime. I am glad that we don’t hear much about them anymore…maybe now we can get down to the serious business of addressing the peak oil challenge instead of just waving it away with pie-in-the-sky talk about hydrogen cars.

    I wrote an article about this topic one year ago: http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/hydrogen-economy-fuel+cell/480

    _______________________

    Washington: Last week I was given an flex-fuel vehicle rental car. There was not a single E85 pump en route or near the return location. It seems that even when there may be alternative fuel, the exising means of delivery are controlled by the competition. I’d bet there are tens of thousands of FFVs in the D.C. area that could reduce demand for oil.

    Chris Nelder: That’s true, if we had the ethanol to run them on! Unfortunately, the chicken of E85 cars arrived well before the egg of domestic ethanol. In my opinion, we will have a very difficult time just meeting the existing ethanol mandate in this country, and it will continue to drive up food prices. E85 isn’t the answer; electric vehicles running on renewably produced electricity are.

    _______________________

    Ashburn, Va.: Why is the mainstream media ignoring the role of the Phil Gramm legislation in 2001 — at the request of his wife while sitting on the Enron board — to allow trading of Oil from NYMEX to ICE, when the number of contracts being traded went from 150,000 a day to 1.5 million?

    Chris Nelder: I don’t think they’ve been completely ignoring it…I’ve seen several pieces addressing the ICE exchange. But it looks like that trade may be put under more restrictive rules now.

    _______________________

    Washington: Could you comment on the role of speculation in the price of a barrel of oil? How significant is speculation in driving up oil prices?

    Brian Hicks: I think it’s important to understand the role of speculation in free markets. Speculation is to markets what air is to fire. They cannot exist without each other.

    If speculators are driving up the price of oil, they’re doing it for a reason, ie, they believe that a supply crunch is coming. As a result, they believe that the current $135/barrel price of oil will be considered cheap years from now. I agree with them!

    And listen, we’ve been hearing this "speculation… and oil is in a bubble" argument/excuse for years now. Remember the infamous Steve Forbes prediction back in 2005 when he said oil was in a bubble… and that it would fall back to $30 a barrel?

    Well, we’re still waiting…

    Chris Nelder: I don’t believe that speculation plays much of a role. I addressed this in a recent column: http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil+futures-contango-backwardation/707

    _______________________

    Silicon Valley, Calif.: Much of this discussion has ignored the adverse tradeoff of more oil meaning more greenhouse gases (GHGs). I anticipate cap-and-trade mechanisms for near-real-time trading of GHGs. While these will be marginal cost compared to $140-per-barrel oil, these will provide other incentives to shift away from carbon. Can you forsee an awakening that an alternative to oil is a national security and human survival issue great enough to result in a $100-billion-scale Manhattan Project?

    Chris Nelder: Yes! And I hope and pray for it, ASAP! Only $100 billion isn’t nearly enough. Maybe $100 per year, for many years…

    _______________________

    Collegeville, Pa.: Okay, so tell me, if I’m your average homeowner who makes enough money to get by but is feeling the pinch like everyone else … how can I protect myself from rising gasoline prices, soon-to-be higher natural gas prices, etc.? What is the most practical advice you can give?

    Brian Hicks: Well you’re probably reacting — correctly — to higher energy prices. You just don’t know it or have acknowledge it.

    What I mean is this… for far too long, oil and gas were essentially free to Americans. There are 336 pints in every barrel of oil. So when oil was trading for $20 a barrel…if was essentially selling for 6 cents per pint. That’s basically a free commodity.

    So, because it was so cheap, Americans consumed as much oil and gas as they possibly could without ever thinking about the future consequences. Well, the consequence is that we’ve consumed over 1 trillion barrels in 150 years… and this was the cheapest of the cheap oil.

    Today, we’re now consuming the more expensive oil. And as a result, Americans are having to look into the mirror… and they have to make consumption decisions based on this new high price.

    Americans — even myself — are driving more efficiently… more locally.

    Chris Nelder: Your best defense is to review every corner of your life and try to reduce your energy consumption: your car, the insulation of your house, your appliances, your commute, everything. If you can, put some solar panels on your roof.

    _______________________

    Virginia Beach, Va.: I read recently that the U.S. produces around 5 million barrels of oil a day, and that of that amount almost 2 million barrels is exported. Do you know why we are exporting oil when we clearly need every drop for our own use? Also, do you know to where it is exported?

    Chris Nelder: Exports and imports are a very complex subject. The EIA regularly reports the data on where imports and exports come from and where they go. Check out the Petroleum Navigator on their web site for the data. Exports from the U.S. are a fine example of why oil is a globally traded commodity, and why oil prices aren’t all about us.

    _______________________

    Brian Hicks: I want to thank the Washington Post for this session … and for all the great questions.

    I’ll see you on the other side of the Peak!

    _______________________

    Chris Nelder: Thank you all for your questions. It’s been a pleasure to have an opportunity to answer them directly, and I hope you found the information we provided useful. For those who want to take a closer look at the data, the possibilities, and the limits of energy in the future, check out our book — it’s all in there!

    _______________________

    Editor’s Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.

    The Big Picture on Q2 2008, Part 1

    June 20, 2008 at 8:11 am
    Contributed by:

    Folks,

    Happy summer solstice! Is it warm enough for ya? I don’t know about where you live, but here on the West Coast we’ve had August temperatures already…

    In this week’s column for Energy and Capital, I revisit the big picture on energy and finance for the second quarter.

    On Monday (June 23rd), I will be hosting an online discussion group about oil for the Washington Post from 10am - 11am PST. I don’t have any further information about it at this time, but look for it at washingtonpost.com, and feel free to jump in with questions!

    Next weekend, my book will be featured at TheStreet.com in their “Open Books” section.

    –C

    The Big Picture on Q2 2008, Part 1

    How to Play Fossil Fuels in a Tough Economy

    2008-06-18
    By Chris Nelder

    The second quarter of the year is almost over, so it seems like a good time to zoom out and look at the big picture again (especially after my last few articles, which were pretty technical).

    The trends I indentified in my big picture update for the first quarter (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) have only intensified. The events in Q2 continued to be negative for the economy, but excellent investment opportunities for those who took advantage of a few of my tips.

    Let’s run the bases again…

    Financials

    The big story in Q1 was the implosion of Bear Stearns, and the beginning of the continuous mudslide of bad news for the financial sector this year. In the second quarter, the poster child for the credit market’s woes has been Lehman Brothers, down 62% for the year. And it looks like Morgan Stanley might be next on the block.

    In both of these financial bear runs, I picked up a quick 10% here and a quick 10% there by playing the UltraShort Financials ProShares ETF (AMEX: SKF). It’s important to get the timing right with a play like this, but it’s not that hard if you pay attention. I watch the news carefully, looking for the early whispers of distress from the financial sector. I buy it when the market is up (which is when SKF is cheap), then after the bad news is plastered all over the front pages, I look for a particularly bearish day to get out.

    For those inclined to play a little speculative money now and again, I think it’s a good hedge against the sickening jolts that have hit the markets with increasing frequency this year.

    The fundamentals of a recession are firmly in place now. The whisper on the street is that the really bad news is yet to come, as broad swaths of the consumer credit markets buckle and break under the strains of steadily higher food and energy costs—the two things that the oft-quoted Consumer Price Index (CPI) explicitly leaves out—and a collapsing housing market.

    If the whisper is right, and I think it is, then the markets are in for another downturn. So watch the news on the financials, and keep your powder dry for their next "good" day.

    Oil

    The volatility in the oil markets has increased quite dramatically in the second quarter, where a $5 to $11 swing in the price over a single day is now becoming more the norm than a rarity.

    Crude_prices_Jun10-Jun17_2008.jpg

     

    As I discussed in my piece two weeks ago ("It Takes Two To Contango"), we should expect to see such volatility increase, as the reality of the supply and demand balance really sinks in, and the market seeks to find the new, proper value for oil.

    A chorus of analysts have popped up in recent days to claim that oil prices are in a speculative bubble, and their fervor only increased when oil hit a new record just shy of a $140 on Monday.

    My favorite piece was an article in Fortune last week titled "Why oil prices will tank," which speculated, "It’s even possible that, a few years hence, we could see a sustained period of plentiful oil supplies and low prices, meaning $50 or below." All I could do was shake my head in wonder as the author carried on about how a "new abundance" would come from shale, tar sands, coal, and "an OPEC desperate to regain market share."

    If that last bit didn’t make you laugh out loud, read it again.

    Investor’s Business Daily, another venerable financial publication, went just as badly awry in its article three weeks ago, "Peak Oil: An Idea Whose Time Is Up." I was aghast at the parade of wrong information and blatant ignorance in that one. I intend to debunk it formally, but it’s going to take a whole ‘nother article to do that job.

    So if you thought everybody was already on the same side of the trade in this seemingly endless bull run for oil, think again. Some of the most-read financial journalists in the country still don’t understand what "peak oil" means, don’t comprehend the numbers, don’t understand the crucial differences between oil shale, tar sands and crude, and apparently, some even think oil is overvalued by nearly 3x!

    For smart investors like you who do understand these things, though, all the confusion out there simply makes for a good trading environment. When the noise is all wrong, you buy, and when everybody comes around to the way you see it, you sell.

    If you took my suggestion in my article two weeks ago, subtitled "Pullback in Oil is a Buying Opportunity," and bought the United States Oil Fund LP (AMEX:USO) that day, at the bottom if oil’s most recent dip, you’d be up about 10% on that position now. Not bad for a two-week gain!

    Oil prices continue to have an inflationary effect on everything, from food to gasoline to everyday products (thanks to transportation costs). We’ll get into the food aspects in the next part of this series.

    The next major cue on oil will come from a Saudi-hosted summit meeting of oil producers and consumers this coming Sunday. The kingdom is worried that instability in the markets and high prices will undermine the oil market and encourage alternative energy. King Abdullah has reportedly instructed his ministers to pursue any solution to skyrocketing oil prices.

    It is expected that the Saudis will announce a 200,000 barrel per day increase in production starting in July. My bet is that even if they do announce it, it won’t affect prices much, or for very long.

    They may also decide to raise their discount on crude. That might actually assuage the markets for a while, because it would help restore the profitability of refiners, and should eventually bring down the price of gasoline and diesel.

    But in a few weeks or months, even such measures would lose their impact as the markets realize that the world really has no ability to increase production from here. Saudi Arabia has announced that they only intend to add about 1 million barrels per day (mbpd) of production capacity through the end of 2009. That increase still seems highly unlikely to me, but just taking them at their word, they are currently producing about 9.45 mbpd out of a claimed capacity of 11.4 mbpd, with expectations to raise it to 12.5 mbpd, and after that, nada mas.

    So while the world waits for the next Saudi announcement, just remember: it’s just more short-term noise along the long-term signal of ever-higher oil prices.

    The Dollar

    The influence of the dollar on commodity prices, particularly oil, continues to be underestimated. I’ll dispense with the charts this time, but my observation in the Q1 update, that oil prices moved opposite to the dollar, continues to hold. According to calculations by Bloomberg, the dollar as valued against the euro has moved in the opposite direction from oil 93% of the time this year.

    That’s a very strong correlation, and should not be overlooked when we hear the latest from Mr. Bernanke. He seems to have successfully jawboned the dollar into a stabler pattern since it crashed to the late-April low, but the recent rally now appears to be losing steam as the expectations of a rate hike in August start to look overblown.

    Without a strong rebound in the dollar, which seems extremely unlikely given the Fed’s current position somewhere between the rock of inflation and the hard place of recession, oil will have to remain at or above its current heights. So don’t go running for the exits the next time you hear some "expert" saying that oil prices are going to crash—instead, buy on any weakness.

    Gasoline and Diesel

    Gasoline and diesel both shattered all previous records (even the inflation-adjusted ones) in Q2. The national average price of gasoline is now over $4 for the first time, and diesel is trading at the highest premium to gasoline in 15 years, 16% more than gasoline at $4.69.

    Diesel is the world’s most popular transportation fuel, and refiners simply haven’t been able to make enough of it. Not only is it by far the preferred fuel in Europe, most of the rest of the world is currently experiencing shortages of it due to enormous demand and limited supply. China, for example, imported 34 times as much diesel in May as it did last year, partly in preparation for the Olympic Games. Across the Third World, diesel is increasingly being used to run generators as their grid power fails, due to shortages of natural gas and reduced hydropower.

    By comparison, 43% of the world’s gasoline is consumed in the U.S., where demand is falling as prices rise. Although the sticker shock of gas over $4 has been hard on Americans accustomed to cheap gasoline, we’re still paying very low fuel prices compared to Europe and elsewhere in the industrialized world, where gasoline in the $8-12 range is the norm. As I have said before, we should really be grateful to the rest of the world for keeping our gas prices so low by not competing with us for it!

    Here in California, a 20-gallon fillup now costs me about $90, and I have no doubt that my first $100 fillup is just around the corner. Believe me, I’m not looking forward to it, but also believe that investing wisely in oil is your best defense against those ever-increasing prices.

    While some destruction of diesel demand will take place eventually as vehicles are switched over to run on natural gas, electricity, and other alternative fuels, those transitions will take years to complete. I expect the current imbalances between gasoline and diesel to remain firmly in place for quite some time.

    Natural Gas

    The trend in natural gas is unchanged from Q1: prices have beat a straight line upward all year, rising from $8.30 on January 10 to $12.95 today. This trend also shows no sign of slacking, for there is very little net excess capacity for gas production.

    Consequently, 2008 has been a sweet year for natural gas producers, with some of my favorites delivering better than 60% returns so far:

    SWN-CHK-ECA_YTD.jpg

    Coal

    Coal has was full of surprises in the second quarter. My Q1 observation that coal didn’t have the signs you would expect from a growth industry was based in reality, but no sooner had I published that article than a massive spike in coal prices began.

    In Q2, prices for domestic coal went through the roof:

     

    Average Weekly Coal Commodity Spot Prices
    Business Week Ended June 13, 2008

    coal_prices_2005-2008.jpg

    Source: EIA, Coal News and Markets

     

    The explosion in prices was reflected in some of the industry’s better coal stocks:

    20080618-acibtumee.gif

    Despite this performance, the EIA expects domestic coal consumption to be lackluster, posting less than 1% growth this year after only 2% growth last year, and a lousy 0.6% growth next year.

    On the production side, EIA expects a 2.9% growth in production this year, and increasing inventories with coal consumers.

    So if it wasn’t domestic consumption, what drove prices up?

    You guessed it: exports.

    Exports of coal posted a sharp jump at the end of last year, and they are continuing to drive demand:

    US_Coal_Exports_2001-2007.jpg

    Source: EIA, Quarterly Coal Report, Oct - Dec 2007

    The primary region consuming all that exported coal is Europe, where a very limited and uncertain supply of natural gas has been driving up grid prices. The outlook for electricity in Europe is increasingly dim, and they’re trying to make up the difference with coal. Flagging Australian coal exports to Europe, along with competition for supply with the emerging nations of the FSU, have really stretched the supply-demand equation.

    Exports of coal from the U.S. to Europe jumped 19% from the third to the fourth quarters of last year, and were 52% higher at the end of 2007 than a year earlier.

    Again, I do not see anything resolving the tension in this very tight market any time soon. It looks to me like another major bull run has begun for coal. The three stocks in the above chart should continue to do very nicely.

    Electricity

    The price spikes for natural gas and coal have translated directly to increasing prices for grid power. According to the 2008 Short Term Energy Outlook, June 2008, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects average U.S. residential electricity prices to increase by about 3.7% in 2008, and 3.6% in 2009.

     

    US_Electricity_prices_1997-2009.jpg

    The average rate of those historical price increases from 1997-2007 is 2.26%.

    In other words, the EIA has just predicted that for the next two years, your bill is going to rise at a rate 63% higher than it has in the past!

    For the communities who haven’t been aggressively seeking to deploy as much wind and solar and geothermal generation as possible, it spells a long march to ever-higher prices.

    But for solar and wind generators, this is great news, because it means that the breakeven point on their projects just got bumped up a couple of years. It’s also great news for those who make solar and wind equipment, like the many companies we have recommended in the pages of Green Chip Stocks.

    Don’t Panic, Profit

    As the fallout from rising energy costs, particularly fuel shortages in the Third World, starts to settle around us, it’s causing a great deal of pain and unrest and confusion. People are starting to panic.

    We understand their fear, but panic isn’t helpful. What’s important is to be able to understand the trends, play them wisely, and put yourself in the best position you can to weather the even harder days ahead.

    That’s why we created the $20 Trillion Report—to spot the plays that will bring you profits while everybody else panics.

    Next week, I’ll update you on the outlook for renewables, food and fertilizer.

    Until next time,

    Chris

    The Bulletin interview with Brian Hicks

    June 20, 2008 at 7:59 am
    Contributed by: Chris

    Reposting a new interview with my co-author Brian Hicks about our book, by journalist Marc Kramer of The Bulletin.

    Experts Say Oil Likely To Go And Stay Up

     
    By: Marc Kramer

    The Bulletin

    Like every American, I want to know why the price of oil is up, will it ever go down and what can take its place? My personal feeling is that the price of oil is up because traders, not usage, are driving up the price. I recently interviewed Brian Hicks, co-author of Profit from the Peak, about what we can expect of oil pricing going forward and what business opportunities will arise because of high costs. Mr. Hicks is the managing editor of Energy and Capital and The $20 Trillion Report. Mr. Hicks writes a weekly column for Wealth Daily concerning high-profit opportunities in the ever-tumultuous geopolitical environment.

    Kramer: Why did you and Chris Nelder write Profit from the Peak?

    Hicks: Chris and I have been students of Peak Oil for over 5 now years. We consider it to be the most significant crisis facing the world this century. There have been many books written about Peak Oil mainly presenting the negative consequences of the end of cheap oil.

    But being inherently optimists, we wanted to present the other side of the issue … the opportunity. We believe that every crisis contains the blueprint for its own solution, and PO is no different.

    The world is undergoing an epic energy shift. What happens today will impact our world for decades to come. And right now, the investment community is funneling billions of dollars into renewable and alternative energy. Some estimate that between $50 and $100 trillion has to be spent to solve this problem. Early investors are going to make a fortune. And we want to be there profiting the entire way. That’s why we wrote the book.

    Kramer: Who is the targeted reader because it comes across as more academic than commercial?

    Hicks: It does come off a little more academic than commercial and that’s because we wanted to present a cogent and comprehensive thesis regarding the opportunity PO represents.

    But the targeted reader is any serious investor who’s looking for a beacon into the future of the world economy and the world energy complex. Energy is the largest market in the world and right now the entire sector is undergoing a metamorphosis.

    Kramer: Are you surprised by the high oil prices?

    Hicks: Not at all! When I was first introduced to the topic of PO in 2003, I was skeptical, much like today’s media. But I looked at the data and started to crunch the numbers and what I discovered shocked me.

    The mere magnitude of the problem was overwhelming. For instance, today the world consumes 87 million barrels of oil per day. The IEA estimates the world will consume 103 million barrels per day by 2015. That’s a net gain in consumption of 16 million barrels.

    So in other words, by 2015, we need to produce 16 million more barrels per day to meet demand. Saudi Arabia produces 8 million barrels per day. So to the put all of this in perspective, the world needs to find the equivalent of 2 Saudi Arabias by 2015. And that doesn’t even take into account the decline rates we’re seeing in today’s giant oilfields.

    Cantarell - the giant field in Mexico (and the world’s third largest) - is now in terminal decline. It’s estimated that global decline rates are in the area of 4 to 5 percent, and many suggest that that’s an extremely lowball figure. But even at 4 percent, just to stay even we have to find a new Iran every year!

    With demand skyrocketing in the face of a super tight supply, the price of oil has to go up. Price reflects supply-and-demand and right now the price is telling us that the market is tighter than a snare drum.

    Kramer: When experts claim the reason the price is up is because of supply verses demand, are they talking about actual oil usage or traders bidding up the price because they believe there will be a scarcity of oil?

    Hicks: They are talking about actual oil usage.

    Kramer: Should we get used to $4 to $5 a gallon gas or will it eventually come down?

    Hicks: Anything is possible. But I don’t see demand for oil dropping for years. For far too long, oil was essentially free. Let me explain …

    There are 336 pints in every barrel of oil. So when oil was selling for $20 a barrel, which was seen as the healthy and normal price back in the 1990s, it was essentially $0.06 per pint. I don’t know of any other precious resource that sells that cheaply.

    So because oil and gas were so cheap, we burned it up without a second thought. In December 2005, the world consumed its one-trillionth barrel of oil. The first trillion barrels were the cheapest oil for the planet. Now we’re beginning to consume the more costly oil, the stuff coming from the Canadian tar sands and deep water drilling. This oil costs more to get.

    So not only we should we get used to $4 to $5 a gallon gas we should hope that it stays at this level because it could easily rocket to $8 to $12 a gallon, a price many European nations have been paying for years.

    Kramer: What would have to happen for prices to go lower?

    Hicks: You have to hit demand somewhere. The Chinese automobile market is doubling every 6 years. The Indian market is expected to grow just as fast. If you take China and India out of the equation, the price of oil would go down.

    China and India, which represent over 2 billion people, are just now entering the modern age. They want the western lifestyle. In this backdrop, I don’t see how oil could possibly go down.

    Kramer: You talk about other types of renewable energy, which one or ones have the most promise?

    Hicks: I like solar and geothermal the most because the infrastructure for them already exists. You can put solar roof shingles and siding on your house or on top of an office building.

    You can install a geothermal heat pump in your home. You can put a vertical axis wind turbine on your roof. These 3 things make the energy generation very local and concentrated. In other words, the footprint is very small.

    Large wind farms like the one being built in Texas takes up too much land. I’ve visited 2 large wind farms in California and the land needed to build and operate these farms is enormous.

    Kramer: Will we see a total conversion to hybrid cars and if so in what period of time?

    Hicks: Well we’re seeing that transition right now, I believe. With the price of gasoline at $4 a gallon, consumers are buying hybrids. The market, in my opinion, is responding to the situation. I think within 5 to 10 years, all cars will be hybrids.

    Kramer: What industries do you see as high growth because of the price oil?

    Hicks: Without a doubt, railroads! It’s cheaper to transport goods via rail right now than by trucking or by car. And you’re seeing this reflected in rail stocks which have been some of the best performers in the market.

    We’re also extremely bullish on industries that support telecommuting. More and more employees are working from home. So companies that sell video-conferencing or “telepresence” technology like some of the stuff coming out of Cisco are going to be in high demand.

    Kramer: Which industries are going to get hurt because of the high price of oil?

    Hicks: Anything dependent on oil or gas - airlines, trucking, shipping. Even restaurants and amusements parks. As the price of oil rises, this will cut into discretionary spending by the American consumer. The American consumer is resilient, but they’ll have to cut back.

    Kramer: Will we see suburban communities building monorail systems as a way to reduce traffic?

    Hicks: Potentially! But I have to admit, public transportation like that isn’t a part of the American genome. Americans are by nature independent. They love their cars because it represents freedom and excitement and adventure. I’m more bullish on hybrids that get incredible mpg than I am in monorails. Or even Segways.

    Kramer: What is your biggest concern from economic standpoint regarding this current energy crisis?

    Hicks: A sudden and severe supply disruption. A good example is a hurricane that blows throw the Gulf of Mexico and knocks out 20 percent of U.S. production. But my biggest fear is that in the very near future, the Saudis call the President and tell him. “Mr. President, Ghawar is in a catastrophic decline. We can’t produce anymore oil.”

    Ghawar is the largest oilfield in the world. It’s been producing for decades. But some suspect that if Ghawar hasn’t already peaked, it’s very close to peaking. As our good friend Matt Simmons has so often cited, if Saudi Arabia peaks, the world peaks.

    If and when that event happens, the price of oil will experience a super spike. And that’s something the world economy cannot absorb. I hope and pray that the price of oil goes up in a very tempered and measured manner. We need to buy ourselves some time. A sudden super spike in oil would cause social unrest a modern day Hobbesian world reminiscent of Haiti.

    Marc Kramer, who is the author of five books and project faculty at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, is a serial entrepreneur.

    Radio interview on Issues Today, plus TOD review of my book

    June 16, 2008 at 2:44 am
    Contributed by:

    Folks,

    Just a quick update for you today:

    First, my radio interview from May 27 on Issues Today radio is now online. You can download it here: Chris Nelder interview on Issues Today.

    Second, my book was reviewed on TheOilDrum.com last week, and a pretty good discussion thread ensued. You can see it here: Robert Rapier’s review of Profit from the Peak

    –C

    The Impending Oil Export Crisis

    June 11, 2008 at 5:29 am
    Contributed by:

    Folks,

    For those who are interested, my book was reviewed by Robert Rapier on The Oil Drum today, and a fairly interesting discussion ensued.

    For this week’s Energy and Capital column, I finally got around to a topic I have long wanted to address: the impending net export crisis. It’s an important one, because it will hit us sooner and harder than the global production peak of oil.

    –C

    The Impending Oil Export Crisis

    Never Mind Peak Oil; Worry about Peak Exports

    2008-06-11
    By Chris Nelder

    Just shy of a year ago, I wrote an article for Energy and Capital entitled "Canary in a Data Mine," in which I examined the global scenario for oil production and demand, and concluded:

    So the upshot is this: There is clearly a yawning gap, possibly as much as 2%, opening between production and demand in 2007 for those of us who depend on imports.

    It looks to me like the loss of export capacity will prove to be the canary in the data mine. It doesn’t really matter if the peak is technically a few years off if we can’t satisfy our ever-growing thirst.

    That canary has now keeled over.

    The problem is simple: Net oil exporters are awash in the cash from their oil exports. As they grow up and continue to industrialize, they consume more of their own production, which cuts into their exports.

    There is also the factor of subsidies. With such extraordinary income from their oil sales, net oil exporters don’t need the income from domestic consumption. They’d rather invest it in building infrastructure and stimulating their economies, so they subsidize the cost of fuel. Fast-growing economies like China would screech to a halt if consumers had to pay the market rate for fuel, so instead the Chinese pay about $2.80/gal for gasoline, and in the countries of the Middle East, gasoline generally goes for under $1.50/gal.

    It should be obvious that as time goes on, the export problem becomes a vicious circle. As export supply falls, the price of exported oil goes up, which sends even more money to the producers, who will use it to build more and consume even more energy, which will further cut into their exports. A growing sentiment among net oil exporters to save some oil for future generations will further limit their output.

    For a country like the U.S., which imports about two-thirds of its oil, the most immediate problem isn’t peak oil, but peak exports. The gradual loss of imported oil has hit us first, and will cost us more than the mere global supply peak would.

    So this week, I take a closer look at the vicious circle of declining exports.

    The Export Land Model

    Dallas-based independent petroleum geologist Jeffrey Brown and Dr. Samuel Foucher (aka "Khebab"), a Ph.D. expert on signal processing, have been working for about two years now on a model to demonstrate the net export problem, which they call the Export Land Model (ELM). Progress on the model and its implications have been regularly discussed on TheOilDrum.com, including the recent update "Is a Net Oil Export Hurricane Hitting the US Gulf Coast?"

    The model proposes a hypothetical oil exporting country called "Export Land," and makes the following simple and reasonable assumptions about it:

    • Peak production rate: 2 mbpd
    • Rate of decline post-peak: 5%/year
    • Internal consumption: 1 mbpd
    • Rate of consumption increase: 2.5%/year

    Here’s their model in graphical terms:

    Export Land Model

    Source: The Oil Drum

    The results of this analysis are startling:

    • Exports cease in only nine years, far faster than overall oil production.
    • Exports decline at an accelerating rate, starting at about -13% and ending at about -48%, averaging about -29% per year over the 8 years of decline.
    • Only about 10% of the oil produced after the peak is ever exported!

    Applying the concepts in the model to the world’s actual oil production, they focused on the world’s top five net oil exporting countries—Saudi Arabia, Russia, Norway, Iran and the UAE—which together account for about half of the world’s net oil exports.

    The results were ominous:

    ELM Top 5

    In their middle case scenario, these top five exporters will approach zero net oil exports around 2031, starting from an average net export decline of about one mbpd per year in 2006. In a recent post, Brown notes, "net exports by the top five net oil exporters dropped by 800,000 bpd in 2006, from a 2005 peak of 23.5 mbpd, and I estimate that they dropped by about one mbpd in 2007."

    According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, data from the EIA did indeed show about a one million barrel per day decline in exports in 2007.

    Exporters to the U.S.

    Since "peak exports" is what we really should be worried about in the U.S., let’s take a closer look at our imports.

    Here are the top 10 sources of U.S. crude oil and petroleum product imports, as of March 2008:

    Top 10 Suppliers of U.S. Oil Imports and Their Fuel Costs

    Rank Country Thousand Barrels Domestic cost of gasoline ($/gal)
    1 Canada 78,814 $5.49
    2 Saudi Arabia 47,806 $0.45
    3 Mexico 42,111 2.35
    4 Nigeria 36,381 $0.38
    5 Venezuela 32,009 $0.19
    6 Iraq 23,967 (no data, probably about $0.25)
    7 Algeria 13,674 $1.21
    8 Russia 12,466 $3.97
    9 Angola 12,043 $1.90
    10 Virgin Is. 9,002 (no data)

    Sources: Oil Import data: EIA. Gasoline prices: German Technical Corporation

    According to EIA, the total crude oil and petroleum product supplied to the U.S. market in March was about 612 million barrels. Total imports were 389 million barrels, or 64% of our total consumption. (Considered on an annual basis, and looking only at crude oil, our imports are probably closer to three-quarters of the total than two-thirds.)

    By way of example, if it were all priced at $130 a barrel, the oil we imported last year would have cost $638 billion, which is probably in the neighborhood of what we’ll spend this year for imports. That’s over four times as much as we are spending annually on the war in Iraq.

    The economic fallout from oil prices has arrived in the form of a widening trade deficit. According to a report from the Commerce Department yesterday, both the price and the volume of imported oil hit new highs in April, which contributed to overall U.S. imports reaching a record $216.4 billion. The trade deficit now stands at $61 billion.

    No economy can survive such a drain on its finances. If we don’t do something to stop that flow of money to oil exporters, it will kill us. Consider this: The price of oil has approximately doubled over the last year. If it doubles again in the next year, that fiscal wound will be bleeding at the rate of about $1.3 trillion per year, or about 10% of our total GDP!

    Charts for Our Top 9 Suppliers

    To see how the export decline problem might affect us here in the U.S., we now look at the net exports of our top 9 suppliers in turn. Normally, I wouldn’t have attempted this sort of data analysis for a weekly column, but I just discovered that Jonathan Callahan of Mazama Science has released a very handy little online tool called the Energy Export Databrowser that makes it easy. (The tool uses data from the BP 2007 Statistical Review, which has no data for the Virgin Islands, so their production not shown here.)

    Here are his charts of oil consumption, production, exports and imports for each country, with the net percentage change from 2005-2006. (Note: for countries with no consumption data, only production is shown.)

    Canada: Exports +16.4%

    Fortunately for the U.S., oil exports from Canada are actually rising, due to a boom in production from unconventional oil and gas, and tar sands. Canada’s production is truly the only significant bright spot in the outlook for oil imports to the U.S., and we have focused on it intently in picking stocks.

    Canada Exports

     

    Saudi Arabia: Exports -4%

    The situation for the world’s top oil exporter is quite different, where exports decreased 4% from 2005-2006, and 7% from 2006-2007 (EIA). At Saudi Arabia’s level of production, this is an enormously worrisome development.

    Saudi Arabia Exports

     

    Mexico: Exports -4.2%

    Mexico’s export decline is of particular concern, since they are one of only two suppliers who can reach us by pipeline. Their supergiant field Cantarell has gone into collapse, declining at the rate of about 14% a year. By the end of 2009, it is projected to be producing only half of what it was producing at the end of 2004.

    Mexico exports

     

    Nigeria: Production -4.6%

    Nigeria continues to be beset with civil unrest and strikes, which have shut in between 800,000 and 1 million barrels per day of capacity for the last two years, and dampened hopes for a significant increase in its production. In fact, its production actually fell from 2005-2006:

    Nigeria exports

     

    Venezuela: Exports -5.5%

    Venezuela’s exports have been in decline for a decade, and the rate appears to be accelerating. According to the latest EIA data, Venezuela’s net export decline rate now stands at -7.6% a year.

    Brown notes that the combined net oil exports from Venezuela & Mexico to the US dropped at the whopping rate of -32% per year over the six months between last October and this March.

    Venezuela Exports

     

    Iraq: Production +9%

    Production data from Iraq is notoriously unreliable, due to a robust black market and deliberate reporting of incorrect data. We also have no consumption data for Iraq in this database. In my considered opinion, the extremely slow progress that the Iraqi congress has made in establishing revenue sharing and production agreements between the various parties, and the continuing violence and sabotage in that country, makes it an unreliable hope for increasing exports substantially, at least in the foreseeable future.

    Iraq exports

     

    Algeria: Exports -1.1%

    Algeria is one of the few African oil producers where the environment is relatively stable, and where oil production might hope to be increased. It is also utterly dependent on its oil revenues, which make up nearly all of its export income, and that should serve to make it a compliant participant in the global oil markets. However, it is still a small producer, accounting for only about 5% of our oil imports.

    Algeria exports

     

    Russia: Exports +1.5%*

    I put an * after that number because Russia’s export situation has changed since 2006, where the dataset used to generate these charts ends. I included this chart for the sake of completeness, and to keep with the same dataset as the other charts.

    According to Brown and Foucher, Russia’s exports declined 6.7% from December 2006 to December 2007. Their projected 10-year net export decline rate for Russia is -8.2%/year, ±4%, with a middle case scenario approaching zero net exports in 2024.

    (For a good detailed look at Russia’s oil production, see Foucher’s recent analysis, "Russia’s Oil Production is About to Peak.")

    Russia exports

     

    Angola: Production +14.2%

    Angola has just surpassed Nigeria for the first time in 50 years as the top African oil producing nation. The country produced 1.87 million barrels per day in April, according to OPEC, vs. Nigeria’s production of 1.81 million barrels per day. As previously mentioned, this is mostly due to the shut-in capacity in Nigeria. Angola’s production—accounting for about 5% of the U.S.’s imports—might be increased a little in the coming years, but in the absence of consumption data the exportable portion is unknown, and in any case is fairly insignificant in the big picture for the U.S.

    Angola exports

     

    Looking at those charts, one thing should be very clear: Many of the big exporters on whose output we most desperately rely aren’t going to be reliable for much longer. Most of the production gains are from small producers in Africa, which are fraught with conflict and relatively inhospitable to foreign investment, so we shouldn’t count on them too much, either.

    A Sobering—and Profitable—Thought

    The impending export crisis is a very sobering realization. When oil imports simply aren’t available, we will be forced to live within a smaller energy budget, and the adjustment could be painful.

    So never mind the fact that the world will still be consuming a wee little bit of oil by the end of the century.

    Never mind that we’re only about halfway through the total amount of oil that the world will ever produce.

    In fact, never mind peak oil.

    The real questions are much more urgent:

    Will the world be ready to deal with zero next exports from the top five exporters in a mere 25 years or so? World net exports appear to be declining at about 2.5% per year already, and according to the ELM model, we should expect that rate to accelerate.

    Closer to home, will the U.S. be prepared to replace the two-thirds of its lifeblood that is imported, before it goes off the market? High oil prices and a struggling economy have already reduced our imports by 6% over the last year, but how close to the bone can we cut?

    This is why we here at Angel Publishing have sought out the best fossil fuel plays we can find in North America. As the old Billie Holiday song goes,

    Money, you’ve got lots of friends
    Crowding round the door
    When you’re gone, spending ends
    They don’t come no more

    Rich relations give
    Crust of bread and such
    You can help yourself
    But don’t take too much
    Mama may have, Papa may have
    But God bless the child that’s got his own

    The unconventional oil and gas plays we have uncovered in the U.S. and Canada may not be able to make us fossil fuel independent, but they will be the resources we count on as the export curtain falls.

    Amid the panic, there will also be profit…and a piece of it can be yours when you subscribe to the $20 Trillion report.

    Until next time,

    Chris Nelder

    Chris

    It Takes Two to Contango

    June 6, 2008 at 2:01 am
    Contributed by:

    Folks,

    First, a few updates:

    I had two more television appearances this week, the first with Neil Cavuto on Fox Business and the second with the Australian Broadcasting Corp. I’m waiting for video clips, as well as audio clips of my radio interviews in the week(s) prior. So stay tuned for those.

    My book Profit from the Peak continues to do well, having been #1 in the categories of “Books > Business & Investing > Investing > Commodities” and “Books > Business & Investing > Investing > Futures” for several weeks now. The publisher says it is continuing to sell well, and the total print run has now reached 25,000. If you haven’t picked up a copy yet, please do! It was also featured last weekend on The Oil Drum.

    The world is certainly starting to feel the pain of high oil prices, from the pump to the grocery store. A shoutout to SF columnist Mark Morford for his excellent opinion piece on the subject, Stay home, read, have sex: Will insane gas prices finally pummel us into evolving? How bad will it get?

    The question everybody seems to be asking right now is whether speculators are responsible for the recent run-up in oil prices, and if something should be done about it. My column for Energy and Capital this week attempts to answer it. Read on…

    –C

    It Takes Two to Contango

    Pullback in Oil Is a Buying Opportunity

    2008-06-05
    By Chris Nelder

    A few readers have asked about the meaning of a term I used in my last column: "contango." So this week, we’ll delve into the murky world of oil futures trading.

    A crude futures contract, for those who are unfamiliar, is simply a contract to buy or sell a certain amount of crude oil, of a certain specific gravity (ranging from "light" to "heavy") and sulfur content (ranging from "sweet" to "sour"), delivered to a specified place, at a specified price, on a certain day in the future. The contract can be settled in one of two ways:

    1. Upon expiration, the holder of the contract—normally, a refinery—takes delivery of the oil and pays the specified price.
    2. Prior to expiration, the holder of the contract can either sell a long position (effectively liquidating an earlier purchase), or cover a short position (that is, buying a new contract to cancel out an earlier sale), to close out the futures position and its contract obligations that way.

    The price of oil futures contracts normally follows a curve, where the price for delivery in the near term—say, next month—is higher than the price for delivery far in the future—say, eight years from now. This condition is known as "backwardation."

    Conversely, when the price in the future (a "deferred" contract) is higher than the near-month price, the curve is said to be in "contango."

    Traders generally look at inventory levels and anticipated production when bidding on contracts. A tight inventory situation now is expected to be resolved by the market in the future, so prices usually fall off in a long backwardation curve over time. But they might also show a short period of contango for the near future, reflecting the current tightness of the market, as demonstrated in this chart:

    Crude Futures Feb 2006

    Normally, periods of contango are relatively short-lived, as buyers take advantage of near-term weakness, which eventually restores the backwardation curve.

    In May, however, an unprecedented change occurred: the futures contract went into a long-term continuous contango, as shown in this chart by "jeffvail" from his post on the subject two weeks ago at TheOilDrum:

    NYMEX Crude Futures '08-'15.jpg

    The sharp upward move of the curves between May 16 and May 20 into continuous contango not only happened faster, but rose farther, than they ever had before.

    Analysts were quick to point the finger at speculators for the sudden change, calling oil futures a "bubble" and offering lots of complicated explanations to support their arguments.

    "Speculation," or Normal Market Behavior?

    As I argued on Neil Cavuto’s show on Fox Business on Monday (video forthcoming), I think the speculation argument has been really overblown. Likewise, I think the hunting expedition this week in Congress, where they grilled oil market-makers and investors to see if the oil markets were being unfairly manipulated, was a waste of time.

    Ultimately, when the contracts are settled, as Scott Nations pointed out in a humorous discussion on CNBC a week ago, "the price is what the price is." It’s the refiners who have to take delivery of the black gold who ultimately decide what the fair price for oil is. Upon expiration of the contracts, as Rick Santelli said, "there is no speculation."

    The fact that we really haven’t seen a wide divergence in price between the middle of a contract and its expiration belies the argument that oil’s rise is all about speculation. Although speculators do play a role in that process, the fact that oil is a commodity that will be physically delivered really limits the opportunity to manipulate the contracts—they’re not like cash-settled futures.

    I firmly believe that what we are seeing in the oil markets now, where crude has rocketed from $100 at the start of the year, to a peak around $135, then falling rather quickly to $122 today, is primarily the simple result of traders trying to figure out what the proper value of a barrel of incredibly useful, energy dense, finite, and diminishing oil should be.

    So yes, speculation does play a role in the short-term fluctuations-when oil is up $2 one day, then down $3 the next day, then up $2 the next-but over the long term, it’s just the market doing its thing.

    By the way, the swing to contango also means that the aggressive oil price hedging strategies that enabled Southwest Airlines to pull the only profit of all the major airlines in Q1 (see my recent article, "Say Goodbye to Cheap Air Travel") relied upon the historical norm of backwardation. If this contango pattern persists, it’s going to put the screws to the airlines even harder…and offer some great investment opportunities in rail.

    Today, the curve is showing a little backwardation at the front, but is still in a long-term contango:

    NYMEX Crude Futures 6-5-2008.jpg

    Source: NYMEX

    The dip is probably a response to today’s inventory report, which showed an unexpected drop of 4.8 million barrels, or 1.5%, where analysts had expected a gain of 2.7 million barrels, according to a survey by Platts. It was the third declining week in a row, and puts inventories about 12% below where they were a year ago, according to the EIA.

    Refinery utilization is currently 89.7%, which is lower than where I expected it to be at this time. If inventories are dropping, and refiners are still running at a relatively low rate of utilization at the beginning of the summer driving season, then refiners are probably betting that the market is softening in the short term, so they’d rather draw down inventories and wait and see.

    A Simpler Explanation

    There may be a simpler explanation, though, than all this gen-u-ine Wall Street gibberish about dancing the contango backwards, or whatever.

    It’s axiomatic that two primary sentiments rule the markets: Fear and greed.

    When the markets are greedy, backwardation rules, and traders can play games like selling the front-month contract and buying the long contract to make money on the difference.

    But when the markets are fearful, and the future looks dim, we get contango.

    And it just so happens that the startling shift to a long-term contango began in the week of May 19—the same week that the financial media seemed to finally embrace the concept of peak oil. (See my article of last week, "The Tipping Point in the Peak Oil Debate.")

    It really might be that simple.

    Global demand for oil is still greater than supply, and we believe that it will continue to remain so (with perhaps a few short periods of easing), so we think we’ll be dancing the contango for a good long time to come—at least until global demand destruction sets in.

    As for the conventional wisdom on the Street, Lehman Brothers and others are convinced that prices are now "anomalous" and that oil is an asset bubble. They believe that global supply will increase faster than expected in the next few years to resolve the tension, and for a while that will probably "talk down" the price of oil.

    But I think they’re wrong. Non-OPEC supply in particular looks terminally broken to me, and any growth in OPEC supply is dubious, at best.

    That means you’ve got a buying opportunity developing here, while the market is underpricing the future of oil.

    Whether you’re the kind of investor who might play the United States Oil Fund LP (AMEX:USO), an ETF on oil futures, or a more traditional investor who might seize the opportunity to jump on some of the oil plays we have recommended for the $20 Trillion portfolio, this is the kind of pullback you’re looking for during a long term bull run for oil.

    Until next time,

    Chris


    Page 1 of 11


    Copyright © 2008 GetRealList
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    FAIR USE NOTICE