At Societe Generale, Michala Marcussen, global head of economics, reckons every $10 drop in the price of oil lifts global growth by 0.1 percentage point. She estimates that since 2014, the world has enjoyed a windfall equivalent to 2 percent of gross domestic product it would otherwise have spent on crude.

“Our biggest relief last week was that OPEC decided no output cut, promising consumers inexpensive oil for longer,” said Marcussen.

Even though falling oil may weaken the inflation rates central bankers are struggling to lift, Erik Nielsen, chief economist at UniCredit Bank, said it was important to recognize that it’s “‘good’ disinflation, because it stems from supply rather than demand and so should raise real income, thereby propelling consumption and the recovery.”

“A drop in Energy prices is the equivalent of a tax cut, with no implications for debt,” he said, adding that faster expansions as a result should end up bolstering prices too and so investors should be wary of wagering on a deterioration in inflation.

Some central bankers are seeing the upside of cheaper oil too. Jens Weidmann, president of the Bundesbank, on Dec. 3 objected to the ECB’s additional easing by saying “the significant Energy price declines in fact are supporting the recovery.” Fed Bank of San Francisco President John Williams said last week the effects of falling oil on headline inflation should also soon “peter out.”

I certainly maintain that the big fall in oil prices, created by oversupply and the continued advance of renewable forms of Energy and also nuclear power, is a considerable long-term economic stimulus for global GDP growth.  Many $billions which were previously transferred to oil exporters, of which there are relatively few, are now largely retained by oil importing countries of which there are many more.  These include most developed economies and also the largest Asia-Pacific emerging nations, which have vastly greater populations than oil producing countries.

However, there is also a significant drawback.

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

“Post Lehman there was too much to do and now there is again,” Marks said Tuesday, referring to the financial crisis that followed the collapse of the investment bank in September 2008. “For the credit investor we have our first opportunities in several years. It’s been a long, long time."

After Lehman’s bankruptcy, Oaktree deployed billions of dollars in distressed debt, reaping a handy profit. Its Opportunities Fund VII, which did the bulk of the investing, has so far distributed $22 billion to clients on $13.5 billion of drawn capital, according to its recent third-quarter earnings statement.

Oaktree’s top executives, including Marks and co-Chairman Bruce Karsh, had bemoaned a dearth of distressed-investment opportunities since at least 2013, when the Standard & Poor’s 500 index was still in the middle of a four-year run-up. That changed in August, when investor concern that China’s economic growth was slowing quicker than expected sparked a selloff in stocks and high-yield bonds. Energy companies have been hit particularly hard as oil prices continue to slide.

“What you saw in the third quarter of this year could well be a harbinger of things to come in the next year or two,” Karsh said in October. “We’re in the later stages of this credit cycle. We saw the psychology beginning to really roll over and change and people starting to get fearful. We started to see a lot of cracks.”

 

Private equity firms have had little trouble raising capital for Energy sector acquisitions not least because it represents one of the few sectors trading at depressed valuations. With a dearth of truly high yield opportunities, investors have little choice but to look at Energy and this is exacerbated by the availability of liquidity in an ultra-low interest rate environment. 

Oil’s tumble to a six-year low touched off a rout in equity markets, as Energy-related shares tumbled with currencies of commodity-producing nations. The dollar gained and gold fell on rising prospects for higher U.S. interest rates.

American crude extended losses past $38 a barrel to the lowest level since 2009 as OPEC abandoned its strategy of limiting production. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index dropped as Energy shares sank the most since Aug. 24, while Canada’s resource-heavy benchmark plunged the most in two months. Colombia’s peso weakened to a record, while Norway’s krone and Russia’s ruble slid. The greenback rallied and gold fell as investors shifted their attention to the Dec. 16 Federal Reserve policy decision.

“Weak oil is the story today,” said Stephen Carl, principal and head equity trader at Williams Capital Group LP. “The lack of economic numbers today is compounding the effect of Energy losses. The Fed rate hike is imminent, and people are trying to square up heading into year-end.”

I think we know both sides of the story, regarding the collapse in oil prices. 

This is a huge boon for importers of crude oil (Brent & WTI), businesses in terms of their Energy costs and consumers who can barely believe the drop in US gasoline prices that has occurred since mid-2014.  

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

Hedge funds have taken their bets. The market is convinced that Saudi Arabia will ignore the revolt within Opec at a potentially explosive meeting on Friday, continuing to flood the global markets with excess oil.

Short positions on US crude and Brent have reached 294m barrels, the sort of clustering effect that can go wildly wrong if events throw a sudden surprise.

The world is undoubtedly awash with oil and the last storage sites are filling relentlessly, but speculators need to be careful.

They are at the mercy of opaque palace politics in Riyadh that few understand. Helima Croft, a former analyst for the US Central Intelligence Agency and now at RBC Capital Markets, says the only man who now matters is the deputy crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman.

The headstrong 30-year-old has amassed all the power as minister of defence, chairman of Aramco and head of the Kingdom's top economic council, much to the annoyance of the old guard. "He is running everything and it comes down to whether he thinks Saudi Arabia can take the pain for another year," she said.

The pretence that all is well in the Kingdom is wearing thin. Austerity is becoming too visible. A leaked order from King Salman - marked "highly urgent" - freezes new hiring and halts public procurement, even down to cars and furniture.

The system of cradle-to-grave welfare that keeps a lid on public protest and holds the Wahhabi state together risks unravelling. Subsidies are draining away. It will no longer cost 10p a litre to fill a petrol tank. VAT is coming. There will be a land tax. Yet these measures hardly make a dent on a budget deficit running near $140bn a year, or 20pc of GDP.

The German intelligence agency BND issued an extraordinary report warning that Prince Mohammed is taking Saudi Arabia into perilous waters. "The thus far cautious diplomatic stance of the elder leaders in the royal family is being replaced by an impulsive interventionist policy," it said.

The war in Yemen - Saudi Arabia's "Vietnam" - grinds on at a cost of $1.5bn month. It is far from clear whether the Kingdom can continue to bankroll Egypt as Isil operations spread from the Sinai to Cairo suburbs.

The war in Yemen - Saudi Arabia's "Vietnam" - grinds on at a cost of $1.5bn month. It is far from clear whether the Kingdom can continue to bankroll Egypt as Isil operations spread from the Sinai to Cairo suburbs.

The rest of this article is very informative and I commend it to all subscribers.

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where a PDF of the article is also posted.

Greetings from offshore of the Orange River mouth on this fine Thursday evening. I believe this may be of interest to David; it is a link to an article on MSR (molten salt reactor) technology.

Many thanks for your email and the short article above from Machine Design on MSR technology.  On this subject, I am just an interested observer, who has posted a few articles on molten salt reactors (MSRs) over the last several years.  It sounds very promising, in terms of relative safety and small compact units which would enable power to be both generated and transmitted more efficiently.  However, safety issues will always be a concern with nuclear power and the problem of highly toxic nuclear waste remains.

Alas, the holy grail of nuclear fission still remains beyond our grasp.   

(See also: Molten Salt Reactors from the World Nuclear Association, and Don’t believe the spin on thorium being a greener nuclear option) 

“We’re not leaning on one or two or three industries to support the job market,” which is “very encouraging,” said Ryan Sweet, a senior economist at Moody’s Analytics Inc. in West Chester, Pennsylvania, whose forecast for payrolls was among the closest in the Bloomberg survey. “We’re creating more than enough jobs to reduce the slack in the broader labor market.”

The figures underscore Fed Chair Janet Yellen’s view that slowdowns in emerging markets or Europe won’t derail the U.S. expansion, clearing the path for officials to raise the benchmark interest rate this month for the first time since 2006. The pace of future rate increases will be contingent on progress toward the central bank’s inflation goal and probably depends on how quickly wage pressures mount as the job market tightens.

 

Considering the fact many US inflation measures exclude both Energy and food, the role wages play in the calculation tends to be exaggerated. Hiring remains on a steady upward trajectory as the economy recovers from the credit crisis recession in about the same amount of time as Rogoff and Reinhart predicted.  

One of the unintended consequences of Obamacare was to disincentivise low income and lower middle income families from working for fear of losing eligibility for attractive health insurance benefits. This means wages have to be higher to entice people back into the workforce. 

Wages are rising and broke out of a four-year base at the October update. Meaningful deterioration would be required to question the medium-term upward bias not least as a growing number of cities seek to implement minimum wages rates in the region of $15. 

To many eyes, India looks like a roadblock to an effective world climate deal. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's demand for “climate justice” -- meaning that rich nations should reduce their carbon emissions even as India and others continue to pollute -- reprises the polarizing rhetoric that has sunk previous international attempts to battle global warming. Yet there’s merit to Modi’s argument, and success in Paris requires that all countries recognize it. 

The first thing to appreciate is that, whatever commitments Modi's government ends up making at the climate talks, India’s fuel mix is growing steadily greener. While coal is still the cheapest and most abundant domestic fuel source, it's getting more expensive and harder to dig from the ground. Many banks already see more potential in funding solar projects than new coal-fired power plants. In fact, the most apt criticism of India’s pledges to reduce carbon intensity and the use of fossil fuels -- rather than cap emissions -- is that the country could probably meet them without really trying. It can and should aim higher. 

That said, Modi’s central argument is sound: India can't accept a hard limit on emissions when it’s still trying to lift hundreds of millions of Indians -- more than 20 percent of whom lack electricity -- out of poverty. Western nations are most responsible for the greenhouse gases now in the atmosphere; the average American accounts for 10 times the annual emissions of the average Indian. Judged by whether countries are doing their “fair share,” based on how much they’ve contributed to the problem and how able they are to pay, the U.S. and European Union’s climate pledges look far weaker than India’s. Among major nations, only China appears to have committed to doing more than its fair share. 

A key point about global warming is that we cannot afford to take the risk that it is not actually occurring. 

Everyone has a view on climate change, and your guess on this frightening topic may be better than some of the Al Gore-style ‘experts’.  Personally, my very unscientific experience tells me that the planet is warming.  I remember how cold the winters were from early childhood in the 1940s up through the 1970s.  Thereafter, winters where I live in London have become gradually warmer, especially the last two.  It is early days for this winter, but so far I have not needed a winter coat, hat or gloves.  However, I know my friends in many parts of the USA thought they were freezing to death during the last two winters.  They deserve some favourable climate change.

Seriously, I do not see how mankind’s growing population, with its cities, industries, household machines, farm animals and travels could be doing anything other than contributing to global warming.  Therefore, I am pleased that so many people are taking the Paris climate summit very seriously, although they may also be creating some hot air. 

This item continues in the Subscriber's Area.   

The creation of a new Energy ministry speaks of the increasing importance of Argentina’s burgeoning oil industry.

Aranguren, former CEO of Shell Argentina, will be in charge of attracting investment to the Vaca Muerta formation, the world’s second-largest shale gas deposit and fourth-largest shale oil reservoir. He’ll also head up attempts to unravel the current government’s system of utility bill subsidies that contributed to an estimated budget deficit of 7.2 percent of gross domestic product this year.

An outspoken critic of the current government who frequently sparred with some of its officials, Aranguren has already made clear his different outlook, saying he would prefer to import Energy while prices are low rather than maintain subsidies on oil. His double role as mining minister suggests Macri’s government may be more proactive in developing that sector after years of stagnation.

 

Argentina is not Iran but they both share the ignominy of having been locked out of the international markets for a long time. Argentina is blessed with abundant natural resources and an educated workforce. A trend of improving standards of governance has been lacking for decades but, with expectations so low, the potential for a positive reaction from investors from even a modest uptick has to be the base case. 

A far-reaching deal on climate change in Paris over coming days promises to unleash a $30 trillion blitz of investment on new technology and renewable Energy by 2040, creating vast riches for those in the vanguard and potentially lifting the global economy out of its slow-growth trap.

Economists at Barclays estimate that greenhouse gas pledges made by the US, the EU, China, India, and others for the COP-21 climate summit amount to an epic change in the allocation of capital and resources, with financial winners and losers to match.

They said the fossil fuel industry of coal, gas, and oil could forfeit $34 trillion in revenues over the next quarter century – a quarter of their income – if the Paris accord is followed by a series of tougher reviews every five years to force down the trajectory of CO2 emissions, as proposed by the United Nations and French officials hosting the talks.

By then crude consumption would fall to 72m barrels a day - half OPEC projections - and demand would be in precipitous decline. Most fossil companies would face run-off unless they could reinvent themselves as 21st Century post-carbon leaders, as Shell, Total, and Statoil are already doing.

The agreed UN goal is to cap the rise in global temperatures to 2 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels by 2100, deemed the safe limit if we are to pass on a world that is more or less recognisable.

Climate negotiators say there will have to be drastic "decarbonisation" to bring this in sight, with negative net emissions by 2070 or soon after. This means that CO2 will have to be plucked from the air and buried, or absorbed by reforestation.

Such a scenario would imply the near extinction of the coal industry unless there is a big push for carbon capture and storage. It also implies a near total switch to electric cars, rendering the internal combustion engine obsolete.

One of life’s lessons in this era is never underestimate the influence of developing technologies and their ability to change the world.  Another is that most technological breakthroughs are achieved within capitalist economic systems.

Moreover, once new technologies become economically competitive, there is no stopping their development, including an ongoing series of previously unimaginable enhancements.  A good example in our era of accelerating technological innovation is the progress of solar power, discussed by Mark Lewis, the chief author of Barclays’ report on Renewables in a latter portion of the article above:

"The average cost of global solar was $400 a megawatt/hour worldwide in 2010. It fell to $130 in 2014, and now it has fallen below $60 in the best locations. Almost nobody could have imagined this six years ago," he said.  

This is immensely encouraging when considering the risks of manmade climate change.  However, we also need luck because no one knows how various climate change risks will play out over time, even if we could theoretically end our carbon emissions overnight. 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where a PDF of AE-P's article is also posted..

Silicon Valley has something to offer the world in the drive toward a clean Energy economy. And it’s not technology.

It’s a financing formula. In a region that spawned tech giants Apple Inc. and Google and is famous for innovators and entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs, a handful of startups began offering to install solar panels on the homes of middle-class families in return for no-money down and monthly payments cheaper than a utility bill. This third-party leasing method -- which made expensive clean Energy gear affordable -- ignited a rooftop solar revolution with annual U.S. home installations increasing 16-fold since 2008, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association and GTM Research.

The world is taking notice. Businesses in China, the biggest greenhouse-gas polluter, are so keen on replicating California’s success that Trina Solar Ltd.’s Head of Global Marketing Jing Tian said she had to come up with a rough Chinese translation for “third-party leasing.” Similar models are spreading to countries like Mexico and Japan and are being employed to sell other emerging clean Energy technologies such as batteries and onsite waste-water treatment gear.

SolarCity took the leasing model that SunEdison Inc. first developed for the solar industry by a graduate student named Jigar Shah. He founded the company and sold its first power purchase agreement with Whole Foods Market Inc. in 2003, according to his book, Creating Climate Wealth.
SolarCity adapted that model for residential consumers in 2008 and many more offered similar arrangements including Sunrun Inc., which developed the first one in September 2007, and Vivint Solar Inc. In August, SolarCity bought a developer in Mexico that was offering the first leases to businesses in that country and plans to expand it to homes there.

And now the idea is spreading to other industries trying to sell expensive capital equipment that reduce pollution and fossil fuel consumption. Cambrian Innovation, a startup out of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has developed onsite wastewater treatment plants. While the high cost make them difficult to sell, when they combine all the benefits to a consumer like a brewery -- lower disposal fees, water use, Energy use and carbon emissions -- they can finance leases and offer savings at no cost to the consumer.

“SunEdison developed the solar power-as-a-service that helped the industry take off,” Matthew Silver, chief executive officer of Boston-based Cambrian, said in an interview. “Now we’re offering clean water as a service that municipal utilities can or won’t do.”

 

With the COP21 conference beginning in Paris today, there are a large number of articles circulating on the advances already seen in the development of renewable sources of Energy. Lease back agreements that have increased access to these solutions is certainly important, but I am curious how these will be structured when interest rates rise and the cost of funding such largesse rises. 

Renewable intermittency means industrial scale storage solutions need to get substantially cheaper and battery technology needs to improve. Progress has been made on both fronts but we are still a long way from replacing fossil fuels. 

The principal drivers of cost inflation vary by commodity, so we have identified and projected the most important costs for each commodity. In the 2000 to 2013 period, cash cost inflation for the marginal producer has been close to 20 percent annually for copper, iron ore, and potash (coal has been lower at around 11 percent), primarily due to the geological factors just described.

Inflation is influenced by external factors (for example, local consumer prices, increase in wages and diesel prices, and local-currency appreciation versus the US dollar) and internal ones (for example, productivity, metal grade, and geological mine conditions). Assuming a scenario of lower oil and diesel prices and a strengthening US dollar versus the local currencies of mining producers, our analysis suggests that external cost factors will be flat, or even negative, for most commodities.

Inflation due to internal factors, however, is here to stay. Even with productivity gains, mines will increasingly suffer from declining ore grades and deteriorating mine conditions, such as deeper shafts, worsening stripping ratios, and longer hauling distances. We expect the level of geological cost inflation will continue to be the main determinant of cost increases, and that total inflation will average 4 to 7 percent per year going forward.

 

In the extractive sector supply and demand data are endlessly picked over for clues to how prices might respond. However it is important to consider that demand growth is much less volatile than supply. The global population continues to expand, not least because people are living longer. Additionally, living standards, on aggregate, are improving. Higher standards of living require greater use of resources such as Energy, steel, copper, zinc, tin, soy etc. so demand tends to trend higher over time. 

The re-entry of China onto the global market as a major consumer of commodities resulted in an acceleration in the pace of demand growth which is now being unwound. Demand growth is not negative but the pace of that growth has moderated. 

The problem for the mining and oil sectors is that they invested fortunes in developing new supply to cater to demand growth numbers that are no longer relevant. This is why the sector continues to underperform and it will continue to do so until supply contracts enough to cater to the reality provided by the market today. 

After years of efforts, China achieved breakthroughs in nuclear export this year with two mega-size contracts signed with Britain and Argentina, respectively. In October 2015, China General Nuclear Corporation (CGN) reached an agreement with state-owned EDF Energy to co-invest in a Hinkley Point C nuclear project in England with respective 33.5% and 66.5% stakes in a deal worth GBP18bn. It is also worth mentioning that China will be able to bring its own Generation III nuclear technology of Hualong One to a subsequent project Bradwell B.

In November 2015, China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) sealed a USD6bn deal with Argentina to build the country’s fourth nuclear plant. According to media reports, CNNC also reached a framework agreement with Argentina on a fifth plant, which will use Hualong One technology if the deal is finalized. 

China’s first nuclear project based on Hualong One, Fuqing 5, achieved FCD in May. Its construction and operation, together with the recognition of developed countries with advanced nuclear tech and experience such as Britain, will help open doors to more markets for Hualong One. However, all these projects will take at least seven to eight years to complete, which suggests limited near-term upside potential for nuclear equipment exports. 

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

The current low price of oil is a benefit to China. However the fact it has to import such large quantities of Energy means building domestic capacity that does not depend on fossil fuel will remain a priority for the foreseeable future regardless of slowing infrastructure investment in other sectors. 

Such concerted investment in nuclear technology has also enhanced China’s ability to compete internationally in what is among the most complex technology fields. This is even more important for the future because so few countries are willing to commit the capital necessary to fund development of new nuclear. 

“There is a sense that this move is a little bit China-related,” Ric Spooner, a chief market strategist at CMC Markets Asia Pacific Pty, said from Sydney. “There has been a trend towards destocking of inventory in recent times and that appears to be creating downward momentum, particularly in copper.”

Metals are being battered by a stronger dollar. The greenback is buoyed by expectations for the first U.S. interest-rate increase since 2006 in December and by heightened geopolitical risk after the terror attacks in Paris. The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index rose 0.2 percent on Tuesday, making assets denominated in the currency more expensive.

We saw a lot of evidence of businesses under pressure when in China earlier this month. The low oil price is a benefit for China’s Energy consumers but for its exporters the loss of Russian and Middle Eastern customers is a headache and is contributing to the economic slowdown. The domestic market continues to transition from an infrastructure investment led model to consumerism. This means the while demand is likely to continue to trend higher it will do so at a considerably slower pace. This is weighing on resources companies. 

The worst oil market in decades would be hard to spot in West Texas, where two-lane county roads are still jammed with trucks and Energy companies are on the prowl for deals.

The Permian Basin, the biggest of the shale-oil regions that ignited the U.S. Energy boom, is also the only one where production is increasing even as drillers idle more than half the rigs in the country during the longest price slump since the 1980s.

And:

The Permian’s multiple layers of oil- and gas-soaked rocks, in some places stacked 5,000 feet thick, contain plenty of places to drill that will yield 30 percent to 40 percent rates of return with crude prices as low as $40 a barrel, Laird Dyer, a Royal Dutch Shell Plc Energy analyst, said at a conference in Toronto Nov. 10.

A single layer in the Permian, the Spraberry, probably holds 75 billion barrels of recoverable oil, Dyer said. That’s enough to supply the entire world for more than two years.

A single layer in the Permian, the Spraberry, probably holds 75 billion barrels of recoverable oil, Dyer said. That’s enough to supply the entire world for more than two years.

“Somebody described it to me once as a tiramisu, it’s just lots of layers of beauty over there,” Drilling Info’s Gilmer said. “Everyone recognizes that the Permian Basin is by far the richest land on earth. The only thing holding it back from more and more is the engineering, and I think this is an industry that’s really proven that the engineering gets better every year.”

The Permian Basin, plus US engineering skills developed entirely by private industry, are currently the single biggest factors holding back the Saudi’s misinformed attempt to close the fracking industry. 

Saudi Arabia’s new government led by King Salman inherited this Energy war, launched ostensibly to retain the country’s most important clients such as China.  However, its primary effort, I maintain, has been to force other producers, starting with the US and Russia, to cut supplies. 

That has not worked, at least not yet.  Therefore, oil exporters face growing deficits.  The current battle of overproduction, while it continues, would be less of a Pyrrhic victory if the Saudis declared that the policy had ‘succeeded’, and persuaded other OPEC suppliers to join them in reducing production.  That would probably lift Brent Crude Oil to the $70 to $80 region.  

“The market rebounded from an oversold territory as investors used the panic to add to their portfolios,” Jitendra Panda, chief executive officer at Peerless Securities Ltd., said by phone from Kolkata. “There’s speculation that moderating inflation will enable the Reserve Bank of India to lower rates next quarter.”

India’s wholesale prices fell for a 12th straight month even while the pace of deflation eased. Consumer prices -- the central bank’s benchmark -- rose 5 percent last month from a year earlier after a 4.41 percent climb in September. RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan has said he can reach his 5 percent CPI target for March 2017 with the current monetary stance. He reviews rates again on Dec. 1, having cut four times this year.

“We expect more than 200 basis points of rate cuts in 2015-2016,” Christopher Wood, chief equity strategist at CLSA Asia Pacific Markets, told reporters in Gurgaon, near New Delhi on Monday. “While earnings growth continues to be downgraded, the offsetting positive is the significant rate cuts.” The brokerage remains “overweight” on Indian equities because the country benefits more than its regional peers from lower oil and commodity prices, he said.

 

Few countries benefit more from low Energy prices than India because it has very little in the way of domestic supply. While other countries are worried about deflationary forces India continues to benefit from disinflation as import prices decline. The current low oil price environment also benefits the government by allowing it leeway to reform the subsidy system without an immediate deleterious effect on the economy.

In this latest work, the researchers used a comprehensive set of assays to measure the expression of all genes in the brain, as well as over 500 small molecules involved with metabolism in the brains and blood of three groups of the rapidly aging mice. The three groups of rapidly aging mice included one set that was young, one set that was old and one set that was old but fed J147 as they aged.

The old mice that received J147 performed better on memory and other tests for cognition and also displayed more robust motor movements. The mice treated with J147 also had fewer pathological signs of Alzheimer's in their brains. Importantly, because of the large amount of data collected on the three groups of mice, it was possible to demonstrate that many aspects of gene expression and metabolism in the old mice fed J147 were very similar to those of young animals. These included markers for increased Energy metabolism, reduced brain inflammation and reduced levels of oxidized fatty acids in the brain.

Another notable effect was that J147 prevented the leakage of blood from the microvessels in the brains of old mice. “Damaged blood vessels are a common feature of aging in general, and in Alzheimer's, it is frequently much worse,” says Currais.

Currais and Schubert note that while these studies represent a new and exciting approach to Alzheimer’s drug discovery and animal testing in the context of aging, the only way to demonstrate the clinical relevance of the work is to move J147 into human clinical trials for Alzheimer’s disease.
“If proven safe and effective for Alzheimer’s, the apparent anti-aging effect of J147 would be a welcome benefit,” adds Schubert. The team aims to begin human trials next year.

 

Health systems in most Western countries are under increasing stress not because of drug use or alcoholism but because people are living longer with chronic conditions. Diseases like diabetes and conditions exacerbated by obesity are expensive to treat and incredibly time consuming. People living longer but with deteriorating mental and physical function, often with complications, represent major cost centres for health systems. 

Oil stockpiles have swollen to a record of almost 3 billion barrels because of strong production in OPEC and elsewhere, potentially deepening the rout in prices, according to the International Energy Agency.

This “massive cushion has inflated” on record supplies from Iraq, Russia and Saudi Arabia, even as world fuel demand grows at the fastest pace in five years, the agency said. Still, the IEA predicts that supplies outside the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries will decline next year by the most since 1992 as low crude prices take their toll on the U.S. shale oil industry.

“Brimming crude oil stocks” offer “an unprecedented buffer against geopolitical shocks or unexpected supply disruptions,” the Paris-based agency said in its monthly market report. With supplies of winter fuels also plentiful, “oil-market bears may choose not to hibernate.”

Crude has dropped about 40 percent in the past year as OPEC defends its market share against rivals such as the U.S. shale industry, which is faltering only gradually despite the price collapse. Oil inventories are growing because supply growth still outpaces demand, the 12-member exporters group said in its monthly report Thursday.

We can conclude several things from this informed report of what is currently happening in terms of global supply and demand for crude oil.  

1) Most producers of crude oil around the world are pumping all they can in an effort to offset the revenue losses from lower prices.  This production currently includes 31.76 million barrels a day from OPEC alone. 

2) Now that sanctions on Iran have been removed, their renewed production will increase next year, potentially significantly. 

3) Oil stockpiles have risen every quarter since 1Q 2014 and now total a record 3 billion barrels (see graph in the article above).  This is a significant cushion against any supply disruptions, due to cutbacks, accidents, sabotage or wars in OPEC or other producer regions.  

4) Global oil demand, helped by cheap prices, will climb by 1.8 million barrels a day this year.  This is the fastest pace in five years and is currently at 94.6 million barrels a day.  

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

"Back to the point of how things are made is changing, here's a small group of people who were able to use the most advanced manufacturing to do things," Bass says. "And I think that's really upsetting the apple cart, in terms of small companies and small groups of people, who are empowered in ways to do things that used to require huge amounts of capital."

The thought that these Darwinian machines can crunch through countless possibilities, mutating designs until they produces something resembling the perfect solution, is a fascinating idea. Bass does acknowledge that the technology won't provide a one-size fits all approach, however, that there will be problems where generative design is an appropriate solution and problems that are better solved by human minds.

And as for the fabrication of future designs, both our own and those conjured up by computers? While 3D printing technology is advancing all the time, Bass is of the view that it will only ever complement existing techniques like subtractive manufacturing, rather than completely snuff them out.

"Does 3D printing replace all manufacturing? It's another tool in the toolbox," he says. "There will be times when 3D printing is awesome, there will be times when manufacturing is awesome. What I think the future of making things is, is this combination of having powerful design tools in order to make them, and the powerful fabrication techniques to realize those designs."

 

3D printing or additive manufacturing is a revolutionary development but perhaps more important is the fact that the above article highlights how innovative solutions can be combined to accelerate the pace of development. Tools now being developed will enable infrastructure development at a lower cost, lower Energy intensity and lower resource requirement which has the potential to greatly enhance the quality of life for many more people. As costs decline demand will rise to create a long-term growth trajectory.  

The rumblings of revolt against Saudi Arabia and the Opec Gulf states are growing louder as half a trillion dollars goes up in smoke, and each month that goes by fails to bring about the long-awaited killer blow against the US shale industry.

"Saudi Arabia is acting directly against the interests of half the cartel and is running Opec over a cliff"

Helima Croft, RBC Capital Markets

Algeria's former Energy minister, Nordine Aït-Laoussine, says the time has come to consider suspending his country's Opec membership if the cartel is unwilling to defend oil prices and merely serves as the tool of a Saudi regime pursuing its own self-interest. "Why remain in an organisation that no longer serves any purpose?" he asked.

Saudi Arabia can, of course, do whatever it wants at the Opec summit in Vienna on December 4. As the cartel hegemon, it can continue to flood the global market with crude oil and hold prices below $50.

It can ignore desperate pleas from Venezuela, Ecuador and Algeria, among others, for concerted cuts in output in order to soak the world glut of 2m barrels a day, and lift prices to around $75. But to do so is to violate the Opec charter safeguarding the welfare of all member states.

"Saudi Arabia is acting directly against the interests of half the cartel and is running Opec over a cliff. There could be a total blow-out in Vienna," said Helima Croft, a former oil analyst at the US Central Intelligence Agency and now at RBC Capital Markets.

The Saudis need Opec. It is the instrument through which they leverage their global power and influence, much as Germany attains world rank through the amplification effect of the EU.

The 29-year-old deputy crown prince now running Saudi Arabia, Mohammad bin Salman, has to tread with care. He may have inherited the steel will and vaulting ambitions of his grandfather, the terrifying Ibn Saud, but he has ruffled many feathers and cannot lightly detonate a crisis within Opec just months after entangling his country in a calamitous war in Yemen. "It would fuel discontent in the Kingdom and play to the sense that they don't know what they are doing," she said.

For decades commencing in the 1070s we have lived through an era where OPEC controlled global Energy prices, due to their enormous reserves of easily accessible crude oil.  In this dominant role, OPEC rulers in the Middle East and North Africa grew very rich, presiding over superficially stable countries, controlled by subjective interpretations of Islamic law, enforced by their authoritarian national regimes, and enormous government handouts to their citizens in an effort to buy loyalty.   

For over two thousand years there have been many similar regimes, albeit with different state religions.  Some of these ruled for centuries before mostly decaying from within.  Others became complacent and could not react to change with the pace of their rivals. 

OPEC countries of the Middle East and North Africa were more often religious rivals rather than allies, but maintained associations of mutual convenience due to their dominant role as the leading suppliers of crude oil.  However, in the last several years the long-held myth of dwindling oil supplies trading at ever-rising prices has been shattered by the march of technology, undermining OPEC’s grip on the oil market from both ends of the spectrum.  

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where a PDF of AE-P's article is also posted.  

In addition to a still over supplied global liquids balance it is of course bearish that OPEC does not look set to change their output policy in the December 4 meeting. The change in Saudi policy was one of the key reasons why we held the most bearish view to oil prices in the surveys one year ago. We were early to identify 1986 as the relevant comparison since this downturn is a supply led downturn and not a demand led downturn. Hence it made no sense to us that Saudi would defend oil prices this time, since the kingdom always has seen the 1980-86 cut period as a mistake. We do not foresee a change in the Saudi tactics in the December 4 OPEC meeting since there are very visible signs that the policy is working, first and foremost through the large global CAPEX cuts hitting shale, deepwater and Canadian oil sands.

It is also important to emphasize that we are still in a situation where there will be no contributions to a potential OPEC production cut from other than Saudi/UAE/Kuwait. Iran, Iraq and Libya is of course totally out of the picture to contribute, and how can Venezuela, Nigeria and the other OPEC countries cut back output voluntarily when their domestic economies needs the exports revenues? Since there is no sanctions on any OPEC country that does not follow the potential new quota, how can Venezuela trust that Nigeria is cutting any output?? The risk would be that Venezuela cuts and it is too small to affect the price and then revenues are falling as the exports volume is reduced. OPEC behaviour is still a lot of game theory… To us this means that the only way we could see an OPEC cut in the December meeting would be that Russia contributes to cutting production. We do not see this as very likely, noting the statements from for example the Russian Deputy Energy Minister in October where he said that Russian oil wells are mostly located in harsh climate in Siberia which means the wells will not be easy to restart after having been shut down and there is no storage capacity for the crude Russia would otherwise have exported.

On October 21 OPEC and some non-OPEC countries held a meeting with technical experts to discuss the oil market but the meeting gathered no interest from non-OPEC countries to contribute to any production cuts. Venezuela has proposed to reapply a new price band for OPEC where production should be reduced when the price is below a 70 $/b threshold but has seen little traction so far on this idea. The response from the Saudi “pump-king” Al-Naimi was that “only the market can decide on prices, no one else”, so it does not look promising for Venezuela which will just have to tighten their belts.

For OPEC it just makes it even more difficult that Iran is set to return to the market in 2016. IAEA must verify that Iran has implemented the nuclear agreement before sanctions can be removed. Iran must reduce the number of centrifuges from 9.500 to 5.060, move installed non-operating centrifuges into storage, dilute stock pile of low-enriched uranium from 10.000 kg to 300 kg, remove the core Arak heavy water reactor and establish verification systems across the supply chain. Iran’s supreme leader has stated that the process at Arak will not begin until the IAEA completes its investigation on past nuclear weapons work and that report is not due until December 15. We have hence factored in that the sanctions are not removed until the second quarter of 2016 in our global supply/demand balance.

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

There are large number of moving parts in the global Energy sector and the number of potential wild cards that could have a major influence on prices has increased. At this stage it is a philosophical question whether the low price environment has led to increased risk but there is no denying that wars on the periphery of some of the world’s biggest oil producing areas is a risk. The piece in the above report focusing on the palace politics of Saudi Arabia is also worth keeping an eye on because of the influence regime change could have on Energy policy. 

Self-driving vehicles may be the answer. Researchers at the University of Texas have conducted a realistic simulation of vehicle use in cities that took into account traffic congestion and rush-hour use. They found that if our vehicle fleet was fully autonomous, every shared autonomous vehicle could replace 11 conventional vehicles. As their study showed, the world would only need 800 million vehicles to supply transportation services for nine billion people, or 200 million fewer cars than what already exists in the global vehicle fleet. That doesn’t sound like a bright future for either the automobile or petroleum industries.

The UT simulations showed that riders would wait for an average of 18 seconds for an autonomous vehicle to show up. Each vehicle would serve 31-41 travelers a day. Importantly, less than 0.5% of travelers waited for more than five minutes for an autonomous vehicle to arrive. Equally important, shared autonomous vehicles reduce the average cost of an individual’s travel by as much as 75% versus a conventional driver-owned vehicle.

A global vehicle fleet of autonomous vehicles could easily be electrified since they would be able to go off to be recharged and cleaned during periods of low demand without sacrificing service quality for travelers. We know that one of the key objectives of autonomous vehicles is for them to be able to travel faster, in tighter spacing and in smaller-sized units. This means that we will need less material for constructing these vehicles with a favorable impact on overall Energy and material needs besides less fuel. Here is another example of savings from fewer vehicles due to an autonomous vehicle fleet. We would also have fewer vehicles needing to be parked, which means that upwards of 20% of urban land currently devoted to parking could be transformed into close-in housing and businesses. Increased urban density could further reduce overall Energy demand by boosting the use of mass transit.

While Dr. Smil is concerned about the increasing cost of extracting Energy and materials due to their capital intensity, which could doom our economy by subjecting it to increasingly more expensive fossil fuels for decades into the future, what would happen if our Energy future follows a deployment path similar to that of information technologies? Several decades ago, prognosticators did not foresee how the world would skip over the building of landline telephone infrastructure and go directly to cellular phones. In 2014, there were only 1.1 billion fixed telephone landlines worldwide compared to more than seven billion cellular phones. Equally as impressive is how much the cost to make these phones has declined during the transition.  

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

Let’s consider how supply and demand impact the market for a new technology. I can own any number of cars I wish but I can only drive one at a time. Autonomous vehicles remove that limitation so I could send the car out to collect dinner while I go to the bank personally. Of course if Uber remains a viable business in a decade then I could simply have a roaming vehicle pick up my dry cleaning, have another pick up my lunch and another pick up my groceries. The car I choose to drive will be for comfort, style and cache while other vehicles will be the proverbial work horses. 

For more than a generation, solar power was a environmentalist fantasy, an expensive and impractical artifact from the Jimmy Carter era. That was true right up until the moment it wasn't. Solar silicon prices dropped 94 percent from early 2008 to the end of 2011. Crystalline silicon has since fallen an additional 47 percent, to $15.20 a kilogram. 

Many were caught off guard by the emergence of solar as a competitive power source. The scientist who led Exxon's research arm back in the 1980s wasn't one of them. 

Peter Eisenberger, now an environmental science professor at Columbia's Earth Institute, co-authored an internal report for Exxon projecting that solar wouldn't become viable until 2012 or 2013. The report, written before he left the company in 1989, suggested that Exxon would do best to sell its solar assets; not surprisingly, the company did just that. What is surprising is that Exxon's 25-year-old solar projections nailed the timing for the arrival of affordable solar power. 

And:

Eisenberger left for academia and in 2010 co-founded a alternative-Energy company, Global Thermostat, at which he now serves as chief technology officer. The company works to reduce the cost of capturing atmospheric carbon dioxide and rendering it useful for synthetic fuels and materials. "Almost all the people that are involved in founding this company—and in helping me get going—were from Exxon," Eisenberger said. "Every one of them. They're the only people who didn't think I was nuts."

Exxon and the other large international oil companies are also working on the commercial capturing of atmospheric carbon dioxide, and understandably so.  Unless it can be effectively and cheaply removed and used profitably for something else, oil and other fossil fuels will increasingly be regarded as pariahs. 

For decades, only a few features punctuated the vastness of the Saudi desert: oil wells, oases -- and wheat fields.

Despite torrid weather and virtually no rain, the world’s largest oil producer once grew so much of the grain that its exports could feed Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman and Yemen. The circular wheat farms, half a mile across with a central sprinkler system, spread across the desert in the 1980s and 1990s, visible in spring to anyone overflying the Arabian peninsula as green spots amid a dun sea of sand.

The shift toward imports, which started eight years ago, is reverberating beyond the kingdom, providing business opportunities for grain traders such as Cargill Inc and Glencore Plc as well as for farmers in countries such as Germany and Canada. 

"The Saudis are the largest new wheat buyer to emerge," said Swithun Still, director of grain trader Solaris Commodities SA in Morges, Switzerland.

Ahmed bin Abdulaziz Al-Fares, managing director of the Grain Silos and Flour Mills Organization, the state agency in charge of cereal imports, told an industry conference in Riyadh last month that Saudi Arabia will import 3.5 million metric tons in 2016. That’s a 10-fold increase from about 300,000 tons in 2008, the first year local crops were curtailed.  An agency presentation says the kingdom will rely on imports for "100 percent" of its wheat in 2016 for the first time.

By 2025, demand is forecast to rise to 4.5 million tons as population growth drives demand for flour, positioning Saudi Arabia as one of the 10 biggest wheat buyers worldwide.

The shift is propitious as the wheat market weathers the largestglut in nearly 30 years, with bumper harvests filling up silos from Russia to Argentina. Prices for high-quality wheat, which reached an all-time high in Kansas City of more than $13 per bushel in 2008, have fallen to less than $5 this year.

Too low aquifers for irrigation of desert wheat; too low oil prices to balance the Saudi budget.  For many Saudi citizens used to the comfortable but rigidly controlled life this must feel like a plague. 

The Saudis were behind the slump in oil prices, by increasing production to lower prices deliberately in a desperate attempt to knock out the US shale industry.  However, in fairness to the Saudis, they were defeated by the advance of technology.  Moreover, they inadvertently encouraged not only oil discovery and drilling technologies, from shale to deep water projects, but also the renewable Energy industries by keeping oil prices high for as long as they could.

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

As in so many other things, China's seeking to play a leading role in 21st century science. And it's using a familiar weapon: money.

Last week, Chinese physicists announced that they’d completed the initial design for a massive high-Energy particle collider, which could become operational around 2025. The project -- which may cost $3 billion and stretch for more than 60 miles -- is just the latest in a string of Chinese “big science” initiatives designed to boost national prestige and produce lucrative spinoff technologies. At a time when money for basic research is increasingly difficult to obtain in the U.S. and Europe, China sees an opportunity to seize the global scientific vanguard.

The regime isn't wrong to try, and the cause of human knowledge will benefit from any breakthroughs that result. But if China's truly going to reap a return on its eye-popping investments, the government needs to do something harder than build a giant particle smasher: It needs to rethink its central role in Chinese research.

State sponsorship of science has its pluses, of course, including speedy decisionmaking on complex, expensive projects. But the costs often outweigh the benefits. Under the regime's heavy hand, the Chinese scientific establishment has long suffered from cronyism,corruption, and pervasive fraud. These blemishes damage the country’s research reputation. More importantly, they help drive anongoing brain drain that no amount of government largesse has been able to stem.

While the relationship between science and the state is politicized and complex in every country (including the U.S.), China’s top-down system exacerbates the worst problems. With scientists expected to serve the state, those who show their loyalty to the regime have typically progressed as fast if not faster than those who make new discoveries. This less-than-meritocratic culture has become ingrained in the influential Chinese Academy of Sciences -- a 60,000-employeebureaucratic behemoth that controls 104 of China’s top research institutions and most of its non-military research spending.

This is one of the more informed articles about China which I have seen.  Whether or not one invests in China, we need to pay attention to this country as it grows in importance.  

Here’s what my friend and brilliant commentator Robin Mitchinson has to say about the Volkswagen affair

At the heart of the VW fiasco are the conflicting aims of two groups of busybodies.

In the Red corner we have – surprise, surprise – the Brussels nomenklatura . They are leaders in the climate change-global warming racket that generates enormous profits for „green power‟ companies and manufacturers of wind turbines, subsidized by the taxpayers of Europe, and damaging Europe‟s competitiveness through Energy prices treble those of competitors.

Twenty or more years ago they exhorted us to switch to diesel power in our vehicles because its CO2 emissions were lower than petrol power. Of course, LPG [liquefied petroleum gas] would have been more effective, but the UK government ratcheted up the excise duty on that, so it became uneconomical.

The European Union motivation for throwing all this grit into the economic machine was to meet the ludicrous emission targets in international agreements which the major polluters – the US, China, et al, refused to sign up to (the fact that this made the whole exercise pointless and worthless was not, and never has been, a deterrent to the men in suits in the Berlaymont).

In the Blue corner we have various US enforcers (motto: „go forth and multiply‟) which have little interest in carbon emissions, but plenty in nitrous oxide -- which does not contribute to climate change, but does create public health problems.

Now the scheissen hits the airconditioning.

The Yanks discovered that VW had been gaming the emission tests all along (and the fuel consumption monitoring).

It‟s tempting to say: „So what?‟ Although over 50 per cent of vehicles in Europe are diesel-powered, only about 1 per cent of US cars are oilers.

In any case, most nitrous oxide pollution must come from the heaviest users -- heavy trucks, locomotives, construction machinery, ships, oil-fired central heating. Will all these now be subject to emissions regulation? Don‟t be silly!

What we are left with is a contest between two utterly conflicting targets. In the Red corner we have climate change; in the Blue we have public health concerns.

It is a reasonable certainty that there is not a single diesel engine in the world that meets the US emission limits. If the VW TDI puffs out 40 times the limit, this only proves one thing -- the limits are fiction; they are clearly unobtainable. And we don‟t know who fixed them, or on what criteria or scientific proof of health concern.

The last time VW got so much publicity was over their way of keeping the union bosses happy with lavish parties, prostitutes and Viagra.

Much more fun than „defeat devices‟!

A PDF of Martin Spring's On Target is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

The fossil fuel industry has taken a very cavalier bet that China, India and the developing world will continue to block any serious effort to curb greenhouse emissions, and that there is, in any case, no viable alternative to oil, gas or coal for decades to come.

Both assumptions were still credible six years ago when the Copenhagen climate summit ended in acrimony, poisoned by a North-South split over CO2 legacy guilt and the allegedly prohibitive costs of green virtue.

At that point the International Energy Agency (IEA) was still predicting that solar power would struggle to reach 20 gigawatts by now. Few could have foretold that it would in fact explode to 180 gigawatts - over three times Britain’s total power output - as costs plummeted, and that almost half of all new electricity installed in the US in 2013 and 2014 would come from solar.

Any suggestion that a quantum leap in the technology of Energy storage might soon conquer the curse of wind and solar intermittency was dismissed as wishful thinking, if not fantasy.

Six years later there can be no such excuses. As The Telegraph reported yesterday, 155 countries have submitted plans so far for the COP21 climate summit to be held by the United Nations in Paris this December. These already cover 88pc of global CO2 emissions and include the submissions of China and India.

Taken together, they commit the world to a reduction in fossil fuel demand by 30pc to 40pc over the next 20 years, and this is just the start of a revolutionary shift to net zero emissions by 2080 or thereabouts. “It is unstoppable. No amount of lobbying at this point is going to change the direction,” said Christiana Figueres, the UN’s top climate official.

Yet the Energy industry is still banking on ever-rising demand for its products as if nothing has changed. BP is projecting a 43pc increase in fossil fuel use by 2035, Exxon expects 35pc by 2040, Shell 43pc and Opec is clinging valiantly to 55pc. These are pure fiction.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) may or may not be correct in arguing that we cannot safely burn more than 800bn tonnes of carbon (two-thirds has been used already) if we are to stop global temperatures rising two degrees above pre-industrial levels by 2100. I take no view on the science.

This article is controversial, although I certainly feel that it merits our attention. 

Solar Energy is developing even faster than most people envisaged, thanks to ‘needs must’ and the accelerating rate of technological innovation which this service frequently mentions.  China has embraced solar Energy because of its chronic pollution problems.  Less developed India has moved more slowly in this respect but has the same problem.  Additionally, even a small rise in global temperatures presents a huge risk for tropical India. 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where a PDF of AE-P's column is also posted.

China said it will take “all necessary measures” to defend its territory after the U.S. sailed a warship through waters claimed by China in the disputed South China Sea, a move the government in Beijing called a threat to peace and stability in Asia.

“The behavior of the U.S. warship threatened China’s sovereignty and national interest, endangered the safety of the island’s staff and facilities, and harmed the regional peace and stability,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said in a statement today. “The Chinese side expressed its strong discontent and firm opposition.”

The comments came hours after the USS Lassen passed within 12-nautical miles of Subi Reef, an island built by China as a platform to assert its claim to almost 80 percent of one of the world’s busiest waterways. By passing so close to the man-made island, the U.S. is showing it doesn’t recognize that the feature qualifies for a 12-nautical mile territorial zone under international law.

The patrol marks the most direct attempt by the U.S. to challenge China’s territorial claims and comes weeks after President Barack Obama told President Xi Jinping at a Washington summit that the U.S. would enforce freedom of navigation and that China should refrain from militarizing the waterway. The spat threatens to fuel U.S.-China tensions ahead of multilateral meetings to be attended by Xi and Obama, including the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in the Philippine capital next month.

In a strongly-worded statement, Lu said the USS Lassen had “illegally” entered Chinese waters and that “relevant Chinese departments monitored, shadowed and warned the U.S. ship.” China has “indisputable” sovereignty over the Spratly Islands and surrounding waters, Lu said.

China bases its claims to most of the sea, a conduit for trade and Energy supplies between Europe and Asia, on a so-called nine-dash line for which it won’t give precise coordinates. China has stepped up its island building in the past year and is installing runways capable of handling military aircraft to extend its control over the waterway, parts of which are also claimed by the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan.

This problem and potentially significant flashpoint has been building for a long time, and it is no secret that other countries in the region, mentioned above, have encouraged the US to support their maritime claims.  Subscribers may wish to keep a close eye on developments in the South China Sea, which are likely to affect investor sentiment adversely at some point.

See also: Beijing summons US Ambassador over warship in South China Sea, and: If US relations with China turn sour, there will probably be war, both from The Guardian)

The world will need an estimated 5mt of additional mined copper by 2025

Copper demand has grown 3.2% each year since the end of WWII. However, we estimate that this growth rate will drop over the next 15 years to be below trend at 3%. This takes into account our GDP expectations, ongoing industrialisation of the emerging market economies and further substitution.

Despite the strong growth in copper demand in China over the past decade (2000-2010, near 15% CAGR), global copper demand was a more muted 2.4% The high price environment of 2005-2008 led to demand destruction of around 2.2mtpa, with widespread substitution.

Taking into account increased secondary supply (+3% pa), mine depletion from falling grades (see Figure 29) and supply additions already underway, we estimate the world will need an additional 5Mtpa of mined copper by 2025, or around 500kt each year. This is more than a Collahuasi-sized mine each year (445kt in 2014) or two Andina-sized mines (232kt in 2014).

Time to first production is now at least 12 years
As shown here, for a typical Greenfield copper mine, the time to first production is at least 12 years. For diamond mines, the time frame has extended to an average of 22 years. For gold mines, the average time frame for the mines currently producing in Cote d’Ivoire was 15 years to get to first production (see Figure 32).

And 

Most major known deposits are currently exploited across Chile, Australia, North American, Russia and China. As shown earlier (in Figure 1 on page 4), Africa has a wealth of mineral resources, hosting 95% of the world’s known platinum, 65% of its manganese, 50% of its diamonds and cobalt, 40% of its gold, 30% of the world’s bauxite, and approximately 10% of the world’s known copper sits in the Central African Copperbelt. Yet today, Africa supplies only 11% and 12% of the world’s copper and gold respectively, plus just 9% of its thermal coal.

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

This report carries a very interesting graphic illustrating the number of conflicts that occurred in the 1990s compared with the last decade. Relative peace has broken out across the continent despite some high profile trouble spots grabbing attention. The question then is to what extent higher commodity prices contributed to this easing of tensions? 

In an environment characterised by a dearth of capital, the potential for armed conflict increases as access to basic resources such as food, Energy and shelter is inhibited. The commodity bull market meant revenues increased and reduced the incentive for conflict. The question now is how many of the gains achieved in the last decade can be held onto and improved upon. Standards of governance are integral to this question because without improvement the potential for a number of major African countries to miss out on development over the next decade increases. 

Considering the weather patterns that will dominate the 2015-2016 winter, Ms. Garriss writes,” Strong El Niños normally bring warm, dry winters to the northern tier of states and Southern Canada. Meanwhile the Southern US has cool, wet winters. Large Icelandic eruptions typically bring warm winters to the Midwest, Northeast and Canada from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Provinces. If history repeats itself, expect lower heating demands.” That is not good news for the domestic Energy business, but certainly good news for homeowners. It may also be good news for underlying economic growth as the combination of lower heating bills and reduced gasoline pump prices may result in more money being spent on other products and services. 

During the past four weeks of the natural gas storage injection season, weekly volumes have averaged 100 billion cubic feet (Bcf). As of the week ending October 9, there was 3,733 Bcf of gas in storage, which puts current storage up at the top of the five-year average weekly storage volume peak. Forecasters have been anticipating that total gas storage will end the injection season somewhere close to, or possibly slightly in excess of 4,000 Bcf. If we do exceed 4,000 Bcf, it would mark the first time in history that the industry began the heating season with that much natural gas in storage. During 2009-2013, with the exception of 2012, the industry ended the injection seasons with slightly over 3,800 Bcf of gas in storage. In 2012, the industry was able to slightly exceed 3,900 Bcf of gas in storage. Last year, the industry began the heating season with only 3,571 Bcf of gas in storage, which was due to the injection season beginning with the second lowest storage volume since 1994 - only 822 Bcf.

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

The record hurricane currently moving towards Mexico’s Pacific coast near Puerto Vallarta and the speed with which it formed may have been influenced by the strength of El Nino in warming the normally cool Pacific. It is going to dump a lot of rain on Mexico and is expected to move into the Caribbean and potentially strengthen again to become a tropical storm that hits parts of Texas.  

In the weeks before the GLBL initial public offering, SUNE was at its highs and we contemplated trimming the position. Since we expected the UOI would trigger a further advance in the shares, we decided against it. Around the same time, oil and gas prices renewed their declines, causing the values of Energy master limited partnerships to justifiably fall. We believed that TERP and GLBL would not be impacted, as neither is subject to commodity risk. We were wrong. Because the SUNE yield vehicles were relatively new to investors, the market did not distinguish them from other Energy dividend flow through structures. In mi-July, TERP began falling along with the rest of the sector taking SUNE with it. GLBL IPO’d at a big discount a week later and traded poorly in the aftermarket. 

As GLBL and TERP continued to fall they effectively lost access to the capital markets, and SUNE collapsed as the market because worried that SUNE would be able to sell its projects and could even run out of money. Ironically, the market judged SUNE’s rapidly growing and massive backlog of attractive projects to be a liability. 

SUNE’s hard-to-decipher financial statements fed the stock collapse. SUNE consolidates both TERP and GLBL on its GAAP statements. The complicating result is two-fold. First when SUNE sells a project to TERP or GLBL it bears the operating costs but doesn’t get to book the revenue from the sale. The result is the appearance of an operating loss. Second TERP and GLBL use non-recourse project finance debt to fund the purchases and the debt appears on SUNE’s balance sheet. The result is that SUNE appears to be heavily levered and losing money. From a GAAP perspective that’s true, but from an economic perspective it is not. Nonetheless, this hasn’t stopped some wise guys from dubbing it “SunEnron”. 

SUNE responded to the deteriorating environment by raising additional equity, finding third parties to buy its products, and slowing it development pipeline. All of these actions have marginally lowered the company’s value, but have stabilized the situation. Taking into account the more conservative business plan, when we look through the complicated financials we believe that SUNE’s development business is poised to have economic earnings in 2016 of about $1.34 per share, assuming that TERP and GLBL do not regain access to the capital markets. 

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

In the movable feast of renewable Energy breakeven estimates it’s hard to argue that lower oil and particularly natural gas prices skew the calculation. Solar technology is advancing at a prodigious rate but not so fast that companies can compete with Energy prices which more than halved in a year. This has weighed on the sector in the short term but it is hard to argue with government mandates that utilities have to buy Energy from renewable sources. 

After a year suffering the economic consequences of the oil price slump, OPEC is finally on the cusp of choking off growth in U.S. crude output.

The nation’s production is almost back down to the level pumped in November 2014, when the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries switched its strategy to focus on battering competitors and reclaiming market share. As the U.S. wilts, demand for OPEC’s crude will grow in 2015, ending two years of retreat, the International Energy Agency estimates.

While cratering prices and historic cutbacks in drilling have taken their toll on the U.S., OPEC members have also paid a heavy price. A year of plunging government revenues, growing budget deficits and slumping currencies has left several members grappling withsevere economic problems. The fact that the U.S. oil boom kept going for about six months after the group’s November decision also means OPEC has so far succeeded only in bringing the market back to where it started.

“It’s taken a hell of a long time and it will continue to take a long time -- U.S. oil production has been more resilient than people thought,” said Mike Wittner, head of oil markets research at Societe Generale SA in London. “The bottom line is the re-balancing has begun.”

OPEC abandoned its traditional role of paring production to prevent oversupply last November as a tide of new oil from the U.S. eroded its share of world markets. The group chose instead to keep pumping, allowing the subsequent price slump to squeeze competitors with higher costs. The group didn’t discuss capping output when its representatives met in Vienna Wednesday with non-member countries including Russia.

I think the headline above is unnecessarily alarmist, to the point of sounding more like an OPEC dream, rather than reality.  A glance at stock market performances of predominantly oil producing countries, relative to Wall Street, provides a dose of reality.

The key point is that all countries which are heavily dependent on oil production, including all OPEC members, are running significant deficits.  To date, their economic policy has been to produce more oil, which pushes the price of crude lower, rather than reduce expenditure sufficiently to their loss of revenue.

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area. 

When it comes to deciding how much to charge Asian oil buyers,OPEC members are showing little regard for tradition.

Suppliers from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries have long moved in lockstep, raising or lowering prices in tandem. Now, Kuwait is undercutting Saudi Arabia by the most on record and Iraq is also selling its oil more cheaply than the group’s biggest member. Qatar is pricing cargoes at the biggest discount in 27 months to competing crude from the U.A.E.’s Abu Dhabi.

While the group that accounts for about 40 percent of global oil supplies maintains a collective strategy of flooding the market with crude, the semblance of unity has vanished when setting monthly selling prices. With Asia forecast to account for most of the growth in global oil demand this year, competition for the region’s buyers is trumping historical allegiances.

“It’s a full-on fight for market share within OPEC,” said Virendra Chauhan, a Singapore-based analyst at industry consultant Energy Aspects Ltd. “That’s even as the group tries to fend off a rise in non-OPEC production from countries such as Russia, Brazil and the U.S.”

‘All is fair in love and war.’  Members of OPEC do not share friendships – just mutual interests.  The same can be said for the EU or any other alliance of self-interest.  When times are tough it is every nation for itself.  It is not edifying but it is how the world works at the international commercial level.

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

Researchers from the University of Alexandria have developed a cheaper, simpler and potentially cleaner way to turn seawater into drinking water than conventional methods.

This could have a huge impact on rural areas of the Middle East and North Africa, where access to clean water is a pressing issue if social stability and economic development is to improve.

Right now, desalinating seawater is the only viable way to provide water to growing populations, and large desalination plants are now a fact of life in Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries.

Most of these plants rely on a multi-step process based on reverse osmosis, which requires expensive infrastructure and large amounts of electricity. These plants release large quantities of highly concentrated salt water and other pollutants back into the seas and oceans as part of the desalination process, creating problems for marine environments.

That’s why the race is on to find a cheaper, cleaner and more Energy-efficient way of desalinating sea water.

In a paper published last month in the journal, Water Science & Technology, researchers Mona Naim, Mahmoud Elewa, Ahmed El-Shafei and Abeer Moneer announced that they have developed a new way to purify sea water using materials that can be manufactured easily and cheaply in most countries, and a method that does not rely on electricity.

The technology uses a method of separating liquids and solids called pervaporation. Pervaporation is a simple, two-step process – the first step involves filtering the liquid through a ceramic or polymeric membrane, while the second step requires vaporizing and collecting the condensed water. Pervaporation is faster, cleaner and more Energy efficient than conventional methods, not least because the heat required for the vaporization stage does not necessarily have to be electrically generated.

Pervaporation is not new – it has been in use for many years. But the membrane used in step one has been expensive and complicated to manufacture.

The breakthrough in this research is the invention of a new salt-attracting membrane embedded with cellulose acetate powder for use in step one of the pervaporation process. Cellulose acetate powder is a fiber derived from wood pulp and is, according to the researchers, cheap and easy to make in any laboratory.

According to the paper, the membrane can quickly desalinate highly concentrated seawater and purify even badly contaminated seawater. It can also be used to capture pollutants and salt crystals to minimize pollution of the environment. The membrane can be used in very remote situations using fire to vaporize the water.

The researchers have yet to prove the commercial viability of the product, but if they can, it could be a promising alternative for developing countries where water and electricity is a scarce resource.

I find it encouraging that pervaporation was developed at the University of Alexandria.  Needs must remains a powerful motivation for development.  Many regions of the globe would benefit from this technology, which sounds as if it has real commercial potential. 

It is at least a partial solution to California’s biggest problem of drought, having used up much of its groundwater.  In addition to the Middle East and North Africa mentioned in the article above, both China and India should be very interested in pervaporation.    

While this initial result is essentially a proof of concept rather than a practical system, it points the way toward an approach that could lead to inexpensive and efficient solar cells or light-driven catalysis, the team says. So far, the engineered viruses collect and transport Energy from incoming light, but do not yet harness it to produce power (as in solar cells) or molecules (as in photosynthesis). But this could be done by adding a reaction center, where such processing takes place, to the end of the virus where the excitons end up.

“This is exciting and high-quality research,” says Alán Aspuru-Guzik, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Harvard University who was not involved in this work. The research, he says, “combines the work of a leader in theory (Lloyd) and a leader in experiment (Belcher) in a truly multidisciplinary and exciting combination that spans biology to physics to potentially, future technology.”

“Access to controllable excitonic systems is a goal shared by many researchers in the field,” Aspuru-Guzik adds. “This work provides fundamental understanding that can allow for the development of devices with an increased control of exciton flow.”

The research was supported by the Italian Energy company Eni through the MIT Energy Initiative. The team included researchers at the University of Florence, the University of Perugia, and Eni.

 

Proof of concept is a big step and this is an enormously exciting field not least because of the enormous potential for artificial photosynthesis. However it could be a decade before we see commercial applications of this technology. 

Russia is running out of money. President Vladimir Putin is taking a strategic gamble, depleting the Kremlin's last reserve funds to cover the budget and to pay for an escalating war in Syria at the same time.

The three big rating agencies have all issued alerts over recent days, warning that the country's public finances are deteriorating fast and furiously. There is no prospect of an oil revival as long as Saudi Arabia continues to flood the market. Russia cannot borrow abroad at a viable cost.

Standard & Poor's says the budget deficit will balloon to 4.4pc of GDP this year, including short-falls in local government spending and social security. The government has committed a further $40bn to bailing out the banking system.

Deficits on this scale are manageable for rich economies with deep capital markets. It is another story for Russia in the midst of a commodity slump and a geopolitical showdown with the West. Oil and gas revenues cover half the budget.

"They can't afford to run deficits at all. By the end of next year there won’t be any money left in the oil reserve fund," said Lubomir Mitov from Unicredit. The finance ministry admits that the funds will be exhausted within sixteen months on current policies.

Alexei Kudrin, the former finance minister, said the Kremlin has no means of raising large loans to ride out the oil bust. The pool of internal savings is pitifully small.

Any attempt to raise funds from the banking system would aggravate the credit crunch. He described the latest efforts to squeeze more money out of Russia's Energy companies as the "end of the road".

Mr Kudrin resigned in 2011 in protest over Russia's military build-up, fearing that it would test public finances to breaking point. Events are unfolding much as he suggested.

Russia is pressing ahead with massive rearmament, pushing defence spending towards 5pc of GDP and risking the sort of military overstretch that bankrupted the Soviet Union.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said the military budget for 2014 rose 8.1pc in real terms to $84bn as the Kremlin took delivery of new Su-34 long-range combat aircraft and S-400 surface-to-air missile systems.

It is to rise by another 15pc this year, led by a 60pc surge in arms procurement. This is an astonishing ambition at a time when the economy is in deep crisis, contracting by 4.6pc over the last twelve months.

Vladimir Putin has a penchant for reckless aggression.  His massive increase in military spending is reminiscent of the old Soviet Union under the eventually fossilized Leonid Brezhnev, briefly followed by the prematurely geriatric Yuri Andropov and then Konstantin Chernenko.  The USSR was in a state of economic collapse when Mikhail Gorbachev took over in 1985, eventually as President before resigning on 25^th December 1991.  The Soviet Union was formally dissolved the following day.   

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area and contains two additional articles, plus a PDF of AE-P's column..

BMW AG’s car-assembly plant in South Africa is doing its bit to help the German carmaker edge toward a global target to supply all its production with renewable Energy: It’s getting some of its power from cow manure.

The company has agreed to a 10-year deal to buy as much as 4.4 megawatts of electricity from a biogas plant about 80 kilometers (50 miles) from its factory north-west of Pretoria, the South African capital. Surrounded by land where about 30,000 cattle graze, the operation runs off gas emitted by a fetid mixture of dung and organic waste ranging from sour yogurt to discarded dog food.

The deal with Bio2Watt (Pty) Ltd., the closely held company that operates the power plant, was struck to bring Munich-based BMW a step closer to its renewable target, according to the carmaker’s South Africa spokesman Diederik Reitsma. The biogas facility, when ramped up to full capacity, will represent 25 percent to 30 percent of the electricity consumption at BMW’s factory, he said in an interview at the car plant.

“We are a big consumer, so that’s a lot,” Reitsma said. “It’s waste no longer wasted.”

BMW already purchases about 51 percent of its Energy from renewable Energy sources, according to the company. In South Africa, the carmaker may consider other clean-Energy sources including solar for the Rosslyn factory, which was BMW’s first foreign plant when it was established in 1973. The facility produces more than 60,000 3-Series sedans a year for local and export markets and produced its one-millionth vehicle in February.

Well, the Germany automobile industry has been deep in it, as they say, under suspicion following the VW scandal.  Consequently, it is a welcome relief to see some positive news.

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area. 

The figures will reinforce the view that the BOE is at least months away from raising its benchmark interest rate from a record-low 0.5 percent. The BOE said last week that its near-term outlook for inflation had weakened since August and that price growth will probably stay below 1 percent until spring 2016, well below its 2 percent target.

“Though prices have fallen slightly over the past year, the risk of persistent deflation is remote,” said Andrew Sentance, an economist at PricewaterhouseCoopers and a former BOE policy maker who is in favor of a rate increase. “As lower food and Energy prices start dropping out of the annual inflation rate, we should expect inflation to move back toward 2 percent next year.”

Just one BOE policy maker, Ian McCafferty, voted to raise rates last month. Testifying to lawmakers on Tuesday, he said the low reading is “largely due to those transitory impacts of oil and commodity prices” and they will disappear from the calculation early next year.

Bank of England officials have been weighing domestic strength against international risks in recent months. While the labor market is tightening, policy makers are still assessing the impact of the global slowdown on the U.K. economy.

The Bank of England has helped foster a recovery in UK economic activity and is unlikely to endanger it by being the first major economy to raise interest rates. Imported deflationary forces in the Energy, food and clothing sectors give the central bank ample room to wait and see what other countries decide to do. 

Myanmar has ambitious growth plans [12]. Officials in Naypyidaw have forecast a national growth rate of 9.3 percent for the 2015–16 fiscal year through a combination of job creation and activity in tourism, telecommunications, agriculture, and other sectors. Inadequate power proves particularly troublesome for the manufacturing sector. In Mandalay, one foundry prices its production of pumps differently depending on whether they are produced during rainy season, when hydroelectric and grid power is available at lower prices, or during the dry season, when the company must supplement supply through diesel-powered backup generators. Making matters worse, the nation’s use of subsidized tariffs means that the government provides power to citizens at a loss. Several years ago, it was estimated these subsidies created an annual deficit of over $275 million. Under past regimes [13], when economic development and domestic Energy use were less of a priority, revenue gained from oil, gas, and other resource exports was used to finance the country’s survival in the face of a harsh sanctions regime. These programs largely benefited a small group of elites and select institutions and are now unpopular, even though the capital and expertise that is derived could potentially fund power sector development.

According to the World Bank, universal electrification should be both “achievable and affordable” in Myanmar by the year 2030 [14]. To this end, the organization has committed $1 billion in financial support [15] to expand electricity generation, transmission, and distribution for the national grid as well as off-grid development. The funds will be utilized to support a National Electrification Plan [16], which the government has developed in cooperation with the World Bank over the past few years. An initial $400 million loan was recently approved by Myanmar’s National Assembly as well as by the World Bank Board of Directors. Coordination meetings between donors, interested private firms, and other parties are now under way, with an anticipated program launch for the first phase before the end of the year.

South East Asia has a wonderful record of previously underdeveloped countries emerging as vibrant manufacturing and consumer economies. With that kind of record there was considerable enthusiasm expressed at the potential for Myanmar to following in the footsteps of many of its neighbours as the political climate evolves. Despite the fact this frontier market has vast upside potential it still suffers from the issue that the number of investment vehicles one might choose from is very limited. 

Global stocks keep on rising. The MSCI All Country World Index gained for an eighth day, the longest stretch of increases since February, as minutes from the Federal Reserve's September meeting bolstered the view interest rates won't budge until 2016. The Fed's healthy view of the domestic economy is tempered by external threats, like China's slowdown. The eight-day 8 percent rally is the biggest since December 2011. $3.2 Trillion of value has been added to global stocks in that period after the worst quarter in four years. European stocks gained for a sixth day, the longest winning streak since July 20.

Asian stocks are heading for the biggest weekly rise in almost four years as investors push back expectations for when the Fed will raise interest rates. The MSCI Asia Pacific Index has jumped 6 percent to the highest level since Aug.20. The move comes after the gauge sank 15 percent in the third quarter, the biggest drop in four years, after China devalued its currency. Now investors believe Chinese authorities will be forced to implement more measures to prop up its faltering economy. The region's best-performing equity index this week is Indonesia's Jakarta Composite Index, which has soared 20 percent.

A Bloomberg index tracking 20 emerging market currencies is on track for its best week in more than six years, rising 3.3 percent. It's been some turnaround from the third quarter when the gauge registered its biggest quarterly loss since 2011. Last quarter's biggest laggards - the Indonesian rupiah, the Russian ruble and the Malaysian ringgit - are this week's biggest gainers. Those three currencies have jumped 9 percent, 8 percent and 7 percent respectively as U.S. rate hike expectations get pushed back and oil rebounds. Any gains may prove fleeting. According to the latest analysts' forecasts, all 23 emerging market currencies tracked by Bloomberg are projected to weaken against the dollar by the first quarter because of the worsening global economic outlook.

Investors benefitting from this sudden rally can be forgiven for rubbing their eyes and pinching themselves, fearing that they have just awakened from a nice dream, and now face more of the scary meltdown that had wiped many billions off stock market valuations. 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

From Oslo to Doha, Riyadh to Moscow, governments that rode crude’s historic rise to unprecedented wealth are now being forced to start repatriating their rainy-day funds just to make ends meet.

The halving of oil to less than $50 a barrel has the potential to alter one of the most powerful economic and political forces of the past half century: the rise of the petrostate. These countries led a surge in state investments in the U.S. and Europe that now totals about $7.3 trillion globally, according to the Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute.

During the last boom, the oil countries flaunted their wealth abroad by buying stakes in iconic companies such as Barclays Plc as well as trophy assets including Manhattan hotels, European soccer clubs and London luxury homes, often in the face of opposition from the local public. 

Such swagger is fading.

The biggest fund, Norway’s, this week said it expects to tap its $820 billion stockpile for the first time next year to balance its budget, following similar moves across the Persian Gulf and in Russia. If sustained, the withdrawals may be felt by investors the world over, according to Michael Maduell, president of the Las Vegas-based Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute.

This may cause some minor turbulence in developed country bond, property and stock markets but the long-term net result is positive for countries which will benefit especially from lower Energy prices. 

However, the Middle East and not least Saudi Arabia has long had a large undereducated (except for religious studies) and untrained population, which has previously had little cause or encouragement to develop work ethics.  This is a recipe for unrest as the free benefits are reduced.  

SolarCity will begin producing the first modules in small quantities this month at its 100 MW pilot facility, but the majority of the new solar panels will ultimately be produced at SolarCity’s 1 GW facility in Buffalo, New York. SolarCity expects to be producing between 9,000 - 10,000 solar panels each day with similar efficiency when the Buffalo facility reaches full capacity.

SolarCity’s panel was measured with 22.04 percent module-level efficiency by Renewable Energy Test Center, a third-party certification testing provider for photovoltaic and renewable Energy products. SolarCity’s new panel—created via a proprietary process that significantly reduces the manufacturing cost relative to other high-efficiency technologies—is the same size as standard efficiency solar panels, but produces 30-40 percent more power. SolarCity’s panel also performs better than other modules in high temperatures, which allows it to produce even more Energy on an annual basis than other solar panels of comparable size.

SolarCity initially expects to install the new, record-setting solar panel on rooftops and carports for homes, businesses, schools and other organizations, but it will also be excellent for utility-scale solar fields and other large-scale, ground level installations.

 

The low price of oil and other Energy commodities has taken a toll on the moveable feast of solar power breakeven calculations. The sector simply has to continually introduce more efficient products and there is good reason to expect it will. Solarcity’s announcement of a production-ready panel sporting 22% efficiency is great news provided the final announced price is competitive. In the lab efficiency rates of over 40% are achievable but it’s a big leap from a sterile environment to rooftops. This is the primary reason SolarCity’s announcement is important. 

DuPont shares surged Tuesday by the most in six years in anticipation that more value will be unlocked. The Wilmington, Delaware-based company said Kullman will be replaced later this month as both CEO and chairman on an interim basis by board member Edward Breen, who oversaw the dismantlement of Tyco International Plc.

Earlier on Monday, Trian Fund Management, the activist investor that argues DuPont would be worth more as two companies, announced it had added to its stake in the company.

In May, Trian co-founder Nelson Peltz led the firm in its proxy fight in a doomed attempt to get three board seats.

"It’s kind of bittersweet, because Trian is vindicated in some respects," said Hank Smith, who helps manage $6.5 billion as chief investment officer at Haverford Financial Services Inc.

in Radnor, Pennsylvania. "If DuPont had embraced Trian earlier on and welcomed Peltz on the board, Ellen Kullman would still be CEO."

 

Speciality chemicals is an amorphous terms used to describe businesses leveraged to everything from agriculture, Energy, healthcare, home improvement and anything in between. The drawdown in commodity prices affected at least two of those segments and the difficulties experienced by Latin American countries has been an additional headwind particularly for DuPont. 

One of the original reports on the potential of unconventional gas was written by analysts at Citigroup and titled “Shale Gas: a gamechanger for the chemical sector”. The boom in unconventional oil and gas drilling was a major benefit for chemical companies supplying the “mud” that lubricated the drill bit and keeps the fractures open so oil and gas can flow. The reduction in drilling activity has been an additional headwind and contributed to the relative underperformance of chemical companies. 

The new Imperial Oil technology involves adding a solvent to improve the flow of oil to the surface as well as generators that burn less natural gas to supply the steam. What we understand about Imperial Oil’s new technology is that currently proposed oil sands projects could produce 55,000 to 75,000 barrels a day in oil output compared to their presently planned output of 30,000-40,000 barrels a day according to Mr. Krüger. As he was quoted during the presentation,

“This is bigger on a per phase basis than we’ve talked about in the past.” From Mr. Krüger’s viewpoint, this technology represents “a very large, long-term growth opportunity.” Even though the company seems satisfied with the new technology, it is not ready to move forward with some of these planned oil sands projects while management assesses their cost, possible changes to Alberta’s regulatory policies and the outlook for global oil prices.

Citi Research has prepared a chart showing its assessment of the impact of technological and economic cost reductions of various oil outputs between 2014 and 2015, based on assumed 2020 output contribution, due to the industry downturn. Most of the decline since 2014 is about $5 per barrel, although Gulf of Mexico costs may have declined by $7 a barrel and the shale formations by $10 a barrel. If Mr. Krüger’s assessment of the impact on output from Imperial Oil’s new technology is correct, then there would likely be a significant reduction in the cost of new oil sands output. According to the Citi Research chart, they estimate that oil sands currently cost between $80 and $100 a barrel. However, if the Imperial Oil claims are correct and can be implemented commercially, then a 30% output improvement might translate into $25-$30 per barrel cost reductions.

Obviously there are a number of assumptions that must be made in reaching this conclusion, including that the solvent-added SAGD process is not more costly than what is being done now and that additional output volumes require extensively larger facilities in order to handle them.
If you are Saudi Arabia and you have targeted new, large and long-term output sources such as oil sands and deep water oil in your price war, the prospect of their costs declining materially has to be unnerving. It has been our contention that Saudi Arabia’s target was these deposits, including Arctic output, and less about the domestic shale business. Why? The shale revolution is a “real-time” output, meaning that if producers are forced by economics to stop drilling, eventually oil prices will rise, drilling will resume, as will shale output, and the price cycle will start all over again.

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

Technological innovation continues apace and lower Energy prices only increase the incentive to develop solutions in order to ensure survival. North America represents an exciting Energy geography and the relatively low price of oil does not change that. On the other hand the continued development of new extraction methods may keep a lid on prices but will increase volumes. 

 

I don't get it. Oil prices are low. Interest rates remain low. When did those factors become negatives? We should be excited (I am).

The markets rose for four years unabated from a previous resting ledge. We are due for a rest (ranging). All of the demographic and technological factors David and Eoin cite remain in place. Demand for securities continues to rise globally, its only a matter of when, not if the markets resume a general upward slope.

Emerging market and Energy sectors are offering a once in a generation value proposition. 

All of this noise by the bears clearly rhymes with past exhortations that went unfulfilled. 

My two cents, not worried.

Thanks for your interesting comments. 

I certainly have no vendetta against bears but when people miss a big move to the upside, they understandably have a vested interest in a significant downturn, so I particularly like your penultimate sentence above.  Markets are often very emotional, with people interpreting the crowd’s panic or euphoria as an economic indicator.  Accordingly, markets discount approximately eight out of the last one significant bear markets.

The world's biggest companies cite many reasons for cutting their climate pollution: It's good PR, it's even the law in many places, and not doing so contributes to the risk of global catastrophe. Here's one you don't hear so much. By blowing their carbon dioxide skyward, power plants are venting raw material and, by extension, a ridiculous amount of money. Waste is being wasted. All that carbon and oxygen must be good for something.

That's the premise of the XPrize Foundation's new Carbon Prize, a $20 million competition over five years to identify "high-value products" that can be made from captured power-plant CO2 emissions. The competition formally opened Tuesday with a six-month period for teams to register their projects that might involve biofuels, fabrics, pharmaceuticals, and building materials. Within prescribed limits, it doesn't matter what's made, as long as the CO2 is captured and turned into something people or businesses want to buy.

Competitors must make it through three judging rounds. The two main prizes of $7.5 million each will go to the teams that make the most of CO2 from coal and gas plants. A U.S. coal plant and Canadian gas plant will be named as the XPrize's test sites soon. The prize is sponsored by NRG Energy and Canada's Oil Sands Industry Alliance.

The guidelines rule out technologies that miss the spirit of low-carbon innovation. Trees, for example, have proven adept at catching carbon, but their core technology—photosynthesis—isn't new. "Enhanced oil recovery" is Energy-industry jargon for pumping CO2 into a well to drive up more oil. That's a marketable use of the gas, but in the service of burning more carbon. 

The Carbon Prize may be the most physically challenging competition yet. Not because it necessarily requires great exertion, but because of the actual physical chemistry of CO2 itself. Carbon dioxide is a very low-Energy molecule. It's spent fuel—the molecular equivalent of passing out from exhaustion after a long run. So to make CO2 into anything useful, you need to use lots of Energy. But producing Energy typically emits CO2, which the XPrize wants people to make into useful products, which requires Energy, which produces CO2 ….

This competition is sponsored by the USA’s NRG Energy and Canada’s Oil Sands Industry Alliance.  They deserve any favourable publicity from this effort, and who knows, perhaps it will spark a sensible commercial idea which lowers CO2 emissions.  It is not a new idea – see Herbert Hoover’s sensible comments nearly a hundred years ago, quoted in the concluding paragraph of Bloomberg’s article.      

David, Whatever one thinks of the evidence for climate change, warnings like this from Carney cannot help the case for holding oil and gas assets. And even if the climate change data proves illusory, the rapid advance in renewables (which grew in the UK to 25% of Energy production in the 2nd quarter) will inevitably hit oil and gas companies. What are your thoughts and suggested actions for investors?

Thanks for the article on Carney’s views and also for your email.

No pun intended but this is quite a hot potato that you have lobbed in my direction.  What are my thoughts?  Regarding Carney, I am surprised by his comments which are certainly off piste for a central banker.  I could say the same for Pope Francis who frequently warns about climate change.

Do these gentlemen know more about climate change than the rest of us?  One might suspect or hope so, whether based on science or divine intervention, but they certainly have a bigger platform.  A sceptic might assume that they seek a larger topic beyond heaven and earth or monetary policy.  Meanwhile, investors will have noted that turbulent markets encourage apocalyptic forecasts.     

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

Energy companies have only recently begun to take the necessary steps to bring Energy supply back into balance with Energy demand.  Despite Energy prices being at similar levels 12 months ago, Energy producers were optimistic that prices were likely to bounce back quickly, and thus were discouraged from making the drastic cuts that would have a significant impact on supply.  However, lower lows for oil prices in August prompted management teams to explore more drastic approaches to survive lower for longer pricing, including additional restructuring, rig count reductions, capital expenditures cuts, asset sales and mergers & acquisitions.  Put simply, we believe Energy producers have felt the pain and are now motivated to truly balance the crude market. 

This is an interesting comment but I suggest that the mainly Western oil companies, which I assume they are referring to, are far from the biggest problem in term of the global oversupply of crude oil. 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where The Weekly View is also posted.

The overwhelming consensus view is that “deepwater is dead” or structurally impaired. We strongly disagree. The tried and true path to long-term success in Energy investing is to “go where the oil is” and that is in deepwater where reserve additions have outpaced shallow water by 3.2x and onshore by 45% (1.3x excluding oil sands). Our field by field analysis suggests long-term (10 year) demand for 320 floating rigs (vs. 225 currently active and a total fleet – including expected newbuild deliveries - of about 385 today). The bad news is that near-term demand remains weak with a rig-by-rig analysis suggesting demand will bottom at 194 rigs in 2H ‘16. A similar analysis of the jackup market implies trough demand of 328 by YE ‘16 (vs. a fleet of about 570 rigs).

Reality bites: Industry to tackle structural supply issues
Rig attrition has begun to take hold with 43 floaters retired in the current cycle to date and an additional 28 floating units cold-stacked with most of those unlikely to return to the market. Although a significant increase relative to the last several years, these actions have only removed 14% of deepwater capacity (23% including stacked units) even as roughly 75 newbuilds remain on order so the fleet will still see net growth absent more aggressive action. The news is worse on the shallow water front, where only 52 units have been retired and 57 stacked (10% and 20% of the global fleet, respectively). With the oil price testing new lows again recently, backlog dwindling and hopes for a near-term demand recovery fading rapidly, the industry now seems more realistic about the need to take more decisive action on capacity reduction. We see scope for as many as 70 floaters and 110 additional jackups to exit the fleet over the next 12-18 months, although we believe the floater market will come into balance sooner given its better secular demand outlook, higher degree of consolidation and greater differentiation between newbuild and older units.

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

The decline in oil prices continues to take a toll on the drilling and services sector with a large number of consistent downtrends in evidence. Inevitably this is putting the most strain on the most highly leveraged operations and rationalisation is a virtual certainty the longer prices remains close to current levels. 

Other than public debt and equity, the E&P industry has also been seeking other sources of capital. Drawing down bank credit lines has been one avenue, but lower oil prices will mean reduced asset values, especially as some of the assets will be redlined because they have been in the undeveloped category for too long so will be considered uneconomic. With the upcoming bank loan redeterminations, we expect to see increased E&P sector financial stress. In March, the last time loan redeterminations were conducted, oil averaged $71 per barrel. Now, the average is $57 a barrel; helped by the spring run-up in oil prices. By the fourth quarter, it is possible the average oil price will be in the $40s. A 40% haircut in the borrowing base will impact 2016 E&P spending.

The E&P industry has also lived off its earlier production hedges. As a result, some companies were being paid in the $90s a barrel for their output, but most of those high-priced hedges are running out. An analysis by investment banker Simmons & Company International and quoted by The Wall Street Journal, cited 36 U.S. oil producers with hedges covering 33% of their 2015 output at an average of $80 a barrel. Next year, those companies only have 18% of their output hedged, and at an average price of only $67 per barrel. Those high-valued hedges during the first half of this year was a reason why layoffs and G&A cuts were not severe, if at all. Management teams’ days of living in a world of unreality is rapidly coming to an end, and the pain will be severe.

Another source of capital for the Energy business has been private equity - pools of capital that can be used to start new companies, buy companies on which to build much larger companies, and to provide capital for companies to grow. Data for the past three years (Exhibit 10) shows that private equity invested $43 billion in 2012, $36 billion in 2013, but only $11 billion in 2014. Private equity deals this year have been sparse as fund managers struggle to find attractive deals in an environment in which it is difficult to assess what companies are worth. That also explains why deal-making in 2014 was down sharply from the prior two years. 

As a result of the 2010-2014 period of high oil prices and expectations that these prices would only go higher in the future, private equity targeted the Energy business due to its large capital needs. Virtually every major private equity firm raised one or more Energy-focused funds. Those private equity firms who have ploughed the oil patch for years were easily able to raise large new funds off their successful track records. With billions of dollars sitting in these Energy-focused private equity funds, finding and executing deals has become a high-pressure effort. 

Increasingly, private equity managers are recognizing that this potential avalanche of capital seeking Energy deals is their biggest problem. It has, and is, leading to overvalued deals. As long as this money has to be put to work due to the mandates of the funds, the pain in the industry is likely to continue. The Energy business truly needs to have the capital flow turned off, not merely turned down. Only then can the industry washout occur and the healing begin. 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

The Energy sector remains in a state of flux and the stress some of the more overleveraged companies are coming under has seen yields almost double in the last two years. BBB Energy 5-year yields are not at high absolute levels relative to history but the trend remains clear. 

Stepping back for a moment, on September 3rd, Tesla’s Founder Elon Musk reiterated his commitment to source materials from Nevada. However, that pledge did not necessarily mean another sourcing deal, announced so soon, or that it would be for lithium. Other materials besides lithium will be required. Cobalt and graphite, (among others), will also be needed to feed Tesla’s massive giga-factory in Nevada. I find this agreement to be highly noteworthy in the sense that Tesla’s growing need for lithium, perhaps more so than that for cobalt and graphite, represents the single most important raw material need. I imagine that other lithium agreements will be signed in coming months. Without question, Nevada wants further lithium deals to come from Nevada.

The fall in oil prices has had a knock-on effect on most Energy related sectors as the relative economics of various alternatives have changed. Lithium miners have been no exception and this has been despite the fact lithium prices have not fallen. Demand for lithium-ion batteries in everything from consumer goods to cars and planes has helped fuel major investment and a large number of explorers are now listed. However securing an agreement to supply Tesla’s factory is a major coup for Pure Energy.

It’s possible that if China’s coal consumption dramatically declines, India will be there to fill the hole. Macquarie estimates that by 2025, India’s Energy demand will rise 71 percent, with coal taking the lead among oil, gas, hydro, nuclear and others. The south Asian country is already the second-largest importer of thermal coal, and it might very well surpass China in the coming years. Macquarie writes:

Although all Energy use will rise [in India], coal is the major theme as consumption and local production are both set to almost double by 2025 on the back of large-scale coal power plant construction plans.

The group adds that, unlike China, India has no present interest in reigning in its use of coal. Most emerging markets, India included, recognize that coal is an extremely affordable and reliable source of Energy, necessary to drive economic growth.

Even if these predictions don’t come to fruition, the consensus is that we haven’t yet seen peak coal use in Asia. Estimates vary depending on the agency, but everyone seems to agree that demand in the medium-term will rise before it retreats. A 2014 MIT study even suggests that Chinese coal consumption could rise more than 70 percent between 2012 and 2040.

 

North America and Europe engage in a great deal of navel gazing when it comes to climate change and yet US emissions have been falling because of natural gas boom and the EU has seen aggregate emissions decline not least because of its sluggish economic recovery. The main future contributors to carbon emissions are the up and coming developing economies. If governments are truly interested in tackling the issue, doing everything possible to help China and India migrate from coal is in everyone’s interest. This is no small task because above all else coal is cheaper now than it has been in a decade. 

The press has been touting the "sharp drop in rig counts" as evidence of an imminent slowdown in oil production, headlining off the drop of 18 rigs in the week ending 9/11. Now if we look at the facts, we are at 652 oil rigs versus 635 2 months ago. Last I checked, 652 is more than 635. Oil rigs dropped 10 in the past week. Gas rigs have been in a pretty clear, slow downtrend for most of this year.

Now of course a drop of 10 oil rigs in a week may sound like a lot to the untrained ear (which most journalists appear to have), but 10/662 = 1.51%, which is not exactly a blow-off-the-socks change. In fact, it is within the normal ebb and flow of wells being taken down to move to the next location, rigs offline for maintenance, etc.

I think the IEA's prediction of "slamming the brakes" on the production of shale oil (see http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/15e4dc9a-585e-11e5-9846-de406ccb37f2.html ) needs to be taken with a somewhat wait-and-see attitude. Low prices will ultimately bring down high-cost production, but economists' predictions about oil production costs just might have included too much sunk cost and not factored in enough efficiency gains in the oil patch. This just could further reinforce the notion that oil prices will stay lower for longer than most in the financial media expect.

Thank you for this informative email and chart contributed in the spirit of Empowerment Through Knowledge. Technological innovation is enhancing just about every area of our lives but its’ influence on the Energy sector is particularly poignant. 

As you know, Australian exports are based on building capacity to fulfil 'firm' long term 'take or pay' contracts. I anticipate some of the capacity will have to be mothballed rather than go to spot markets if the 'takers' default on the contracts. You do not mention Canada, where there are logistical problems and governmental changes threatening production for export.

Thank you for these relevant points in response to my piece on LNG on Friday. Considering the stress the Canadian Energy sector is currently under it is debatable whether West Coast export facilities will be built. This site from the British Columbia government highlights the fact that ground has not yet been broken on any of the proposed projects. 

Hope isn’t a strategy – but what can you tell me about this chart?   It’s the Canadian Energy index.  What signs should I be looking for?

This has been a very active week in just about all markets but the only emails from subscribers I received in the last two days were focused on the Energy market. I chose to publish this one because it’s from a normally very calm person but the stress he is feeling is evident in the wording. 

Hi Eoin, I love my daily read of your great service.

What is your opinion on Royal Dutch Shell, I am under water by about 30% not counting dividends.

Thank you for this question which is sure to be of interest to other subscribers and I’m delighted you’re enjoying the service. The steep decline in a large number of sectors, particularly Energy has left a lot of people in a similar dilemma. My first thought is that with a share yielding 7.71% today it would be rash to ignore the dividend even if the yield was lower when you purchased it. 

This analyst made a couple of other interesting observations. He said he questioned E&P management teams about their view of the level for oil prices that would generate returns similar to those earned when crude oil was at $90 a barrel and finding and development costs were much higher than today’s. In his view, the consensus was that $60-$70 a barrel is the “new $90 a barrel” oil given lower well costs and improved corporate efficiencies. He also said that producers acknowledged that returns were “skinny” with crude oil in the low $40s a barrel. We aren’t sure what “skinny” equates to, but we suspect not much profit, if any at all.

We were interested in his other observation, which dealt with how producers are coping with the current environment. He said that producers seemed to be reverting to the “1980’s playbook.” What does that mean? How about drilling within cash flow and attempting to hold production flat. What novel concepts! What someone who didn’t live through the ‘80’s and ‘90’s might not understand is that the playbook resulted from there not being cheap capital and private equity money available then. In fact, following the demise of Continental Illinois Bank in Chicago and Penn Square Bank in Oklahoma City, commercial banks almost outlawed Energy lending in the 1980’s as it was considered too speculative, so there was virtually no new capital available. Today, we live in a world driven by easy money policies globally, meaning zero interest rates, which contributed to the high oil prices of 2009-2014 and the surge in capital flowing into private equity funds. A recent quote from economist and money manager Gary Shilling highlights this phenomenon and its damage to the Energy industry. He said:

“The oil optimists noted that earlier high oil prices, aided by low financing costs, had pushed up production, especially among U.S. frackers. Low prices, they reasoned, would curb production, especially since fracked wells tend to be short-lived and the cost of drilling new ones exceeded the depressed prices. But a funny thing happened on the way to $80 oil: The rally stopped dead in its tracks at about $60 in May and June, then slid to the current $42, a new low. “Me? I'm sticking with my forecast of $10 to $20 a barrel.”      

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

This Service is not bullish of oil prices over the medium-term and we have been vocally proclaiming how much of gamechanger shale oil and gas are for years. However $10 - $20 is an aggressive forecast even in an environment where major producers such as Saudi Arabia and Iran are competing for market share and prices are working on a ninth consecutive week to the downside. 

A surprise devaluation of the renminbi has raised the stakes of an economic slowdown in China for global companies that have relied on the country as the engine of growth around the world.

All of that comes at a time when companies already have been buffeted by falling oil prices and a rising US dollar. Valuations, in the US at least, look stretched at 17 times for the S&P 500.

“We all knew that China’s economy was under pressure but the devaluation was an indication that it is worse than expected and that is a problem for corporate earnings,” says Nicholas Colas, chief market strategist at Convergex.

Blue-chip UK, US and eurozone companies in sectors long dependent on China, including carmakers, miners and luxury goods retailers, have endured the brunt of selling by investors this week. This comes when companies in the Energy, materials and industrials sectors have been lagging badly for much of this year, with falling commodity prices suggesting demand from China has slipped into a much lower gear.

“Companies with sales of 20 per cent or more to China have been penalised in the market, but so have those that are tied to commodity prices where demand from developing regions has been key to the former super cycle thesis,” says Tobias Levkovich, head of US equity strategy at Citi.

“First and foremost has been the idea that Chinese demand wanes and the world is left with a glut of production and inventory that causes price discounting for everything from drugs to electronics to cars (and well beyond just oil and iron ore), which compresses corporate profits worldwide,” he adds.

Now the question facing equity investors is whether China’s devaluation can help bolster overall growth and demand for the products and services sold by global companies from the US and Europe. While share prices were stabilising in Europe and the US on Thursday, many believe the pressure is not likely to let up soon.

“In Europe, they’ve been banking on their exports looking cheaper — 40 per cent of European gross domestic product is exports — and the problem is again the Chinese are jumping on board to drive growth through an increase in exports,” says David Lebovitz, global market strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management.

Many investors are panicking over China’s economic slowdown and stock market volatility.  That said, the Shanghai A-Shares Composite Index is still higher on the year by 13.82% in US Dollar terms.   

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

Amazon.com Inc. held a Prime Day on July 15 to mark its 20th anniversary, featuring reduced prices on television sets, lawnmowers and other goods. The company said the promotion helped to drive orders surpassing Black Friday, an annual U.S. sales event following the Thanksgiving Day holiday that kicks off the year-end shopping season.

The job market is giving consumers the wherewithal to keep spending. Payrolls grew in July by 215,000 workers following a 231,000 gain in the prior month, and the jobless rate held at a seven-year low of 5.3 percent.

Low Energy prices and cheaper imports have acted as an enabler for consumers which has helped Consumer Staples shares retain a position of relative strength. However, that does not negate the fact the retail sector remains intensively competitive particularly between bricks and mortar stores and online platforms. This has forced the former to open e-commerce sites while some youth oriented brands now maintain physical locations so potential customers can try on items but then buy them online. 

We are not convinced that the stock market needs higher commodity and oil prices in order to continue to rise. In our view, the shift in the direction of commodity prices since 2010 reflects a transfer of the benefits of higher commodity production from producers to consumers. That means basic industries and consumers should be the beneficiaries of falling commodity prices. Long-term, commodity prices should climb in response to increased consumption, which will drive up corporate earnings that are necessary to support higher share prices. A higher stock market can come without oil prices reaching new all-time highs, but they need to be higher than current levels for Energy company earnings to rebound, that is unless substantial operating costs can be removed from the Energy business. The Energy business may get both, and investors will benefit from increased share prices. Unfortunately, this isn’t likely until sometime in 2016.

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

It strikes me as odd that anyone thinks you need a high oil price to support a bull market in equities outside the Energy sector. The stock market does not need high oil prices to rally but it does need the perception that the future will be better than the past to justify progressively higher prices. Admittedly this is often associated with higher Energy demand.

The concentration of revenues in the Energy sector that occurred as a result of the high Energy price environment is over. This has acted as an incentive for mergers. Consumers will be medium-term beneficiaries as Energy savings accrue and spending power improves. But what about the short term?

The new reactor is designed for basic research on fusion and also as a potential prototype power plant that could produce 270MW of electrical power. The basic reactor concept and its associated elements are based on well-tested and proven principles developed over decades of research at MIT and around the world, the team says. An experimental tokamak was built at Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory circa 1980.

The hard part has been confining the superhot plasma — an electrically charged gas — while heating it to temperatures hotter than the cores of stars. This is where the magnetic fields are so important — they effectively trap the heat and particles in the hot center of the device.

While most characteristics of a system tend to vary in proportion to changes in dimensions, the effect of changes in the magnetic field on fusion reactions is much more extreme: The achievable fusion power increases according to the fourth power of the increase in the magnetic field.
Tenfold boost in power

The new superconductors are strong enough to increase fusion power by about a factor of 10 compared to standard superconducting technology, Sorbom says. This dramatic improvement leads to a cascade of potential improvements in reactor design. 

 

This is a difficult time in markets and some caution is warranted however short-term volatility has no effect on the rate of technological innovation that remains perhaps the most bullish medium-term consideration for investors. Economic development is predicated on access to abundant, reasonably priced Energy and fusion technology represents a powerful potential enabler which is why it is so exciting. We will always need more Energy and the challenge is how to generate it as cleanly as possible. 

When we look at their price patterns, there is some technical support at current levels for both [crude oil and oil shares] (see horizontal lines above).  Sentiment in the short term is getting close to a pessimistic extreme (see Weekly Chart below), but the primary trends (not shown) are still firmly down.  Interestingly, our chart above shows the Energy sector’s relative performance has clearly broken below its March low, whereas oil prices have not.  This observation suggests to us that Energy investors are now coming to terms with the idea of lower oil prices for a longer period of time.  We think they are right, and the risk for oil prices is that they ultimately break down to a lower low, potentially even re-testing the 2008 lows in the mid-to low-$30s price range.  Should that occur, the fundamental case for a longer term bottom would be more compelling as it would likely solicit both a supply and a demand response.  Our current fundamental view on oil prices is that a trading range is forming with an upside cap somewhere between $60 and $70, which is where the short-term supply from US producers will increase.  As yet, we do not have a strong fundamental view regarding the bottom of the range.  In the meantime, we suggest patience.  

The key variable with any commodity is usually supply.  Currently, the world is awash with oil.  Traditional producers did not anticipate the technological developments, including fracking, which have produced additional supplies of crude oil.  Shocked by their significant loss of revenue, they have responded by increasing production.  The Saudi’s, in particular, are waiting, expecting, hoping… that higher-cost production slumps. 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where The Weekly View is also posted.

If the oil futures market is correct, Saudi Arabia will start running into trouble within two years. It will be in existential crisis by the end of the decade.

The contract price of US crude oil for delivery in December 2020 is currently $62.05, implying a drastic change in the economic landscape for the Middle East and the petro-rentier states.

The Saudis took a huge gamble last November when they stopped supporting prices and opted instead to flood the market and drive out rivals, boosting their own output to 10.6m barrels a day (b/d) into the teeth of the downturn.

Bank of America says OPEC is now "effectively dissolved". The cartel might as well shut down its offices in Vienna to save money.

If the aim was to choke the US shale industry, the Saudis have misjudged badly, just as they misjudged the growing shale threat at every stage for eight years. "It is becoming apparent that non-OPEC producers are not as responsive to low oil prices as had been thought, at least in the short-run," said the Saudi central bank in its latest stability report.

"The main impact has been to cut back on developmental drilling of new oil wells, rather than slowing the flow of oil from existing wells. This requires more patience," it said.

One Saudi expert was blunter. "The policy hasn't worked and it will never work," he said.

By causing the oil price to crash, the Saudis and their Gulf allies have certainly killed off prospects for a raft of high-cost ventures in the Russian Arctic, the Gulf of Mexico, the deep waters of the mid-Atlantic, and the Canadian tar sands.

Consultants Wood Mackenzie say the major oil and gas companies have shelved 46 large projects, deferring $200bn of investments.

The problem for the Saudis is that US shale frackers are not high-cost. They are mostly mid-cost, and as I reported from the CERAWeek Energy forum in Houston, experts at IHS think shale companies may be able to shave those costs by 45pc this year - and not only by switching tactically to high-yielding wells.

Advanced pad drilling techniques allow frackers to launch five or ten wells in different directions from the same site. Smart drill-bits with computer chips can seek out cracks in the rock. New dissolvable plugs promise to save $300,000 a well. "We've driven down drilling costs by 50pc, and we can see another 30pc ahead," said John Hess, head of the Hess Corporation.

It was the same story from Scott Sheffield, head of Pioneer Natural Resources. "We have just drilled an 18,000 ft well in 16 days in the Permian Basin. Last year it took 30 days," he said.

The North American rig-count has dropped to 664 from 1,608 in October but output still rose to a 43-year high of 9.6m b/d June. It has only just begun to roll over. "The freight train of North American tight oil has kept on coming," said Rex Tillerson, head of Exxon Mobil.

The Saudi’s have or had larger reserves from the sale of conventionally produced oil and gas than other Energy exporters but they are all in trouble. 

The first remarkable fact about US shale oil and gas production that we are hearing about more frequently is the speed and efficiency with which this technology has developed, significantly lowering costs in the process. 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where a PDF of AE-P’s article is also posted.

Bristow was preceded at the presentation by Randgold Chairman, Chris Coleman, who reminded those present that Randgold was formed almost exactly 20 years ago when the gold price was at a virtual all-time low. The point here being that the current low gold price is not as bad as it was back then, and Randgold has thrived since its very beginnings, in both lower and higher gold price environments.

Bristow continued on the same theme, saying that in terms of the gold price in real terms, Randgold was nearly back where it started! He re-iterated the company has always followed a basic strategy that allowed it to be able to continue to build, while many of its peers were still trying to figure out how to survive in the current gold price environment. “I’ve always tried to do the opposite to the industry and grow in the troughs,” Bristow said to Richard Quest of CNN. Randgold has not wavered from its strategy of only developing good-sized projects offering strong returns at $1000 gold and this policy has held it in good stead.

As far as the Q2 figures were concerned, not surprisingly, Bristow tended to dwell more on the positive aspects of the results. These included a solid all-round performance from its operations, with improvements in grade, throughput and recovery, leading to a new gold production record and a higher profit compared with Q1 in the face of a declining gold price. 

 

Gold miners are now trading at around the same levels relative to the gold price as they did before the commodity bull market. This highlights just how unsuccessful the sector on aggregate has been in controlling cost inflation. However as Energy prices pull back and wage inflation moderates, or even contracts, the ability of miners with reasonable debt loads to prosper should improve. This means we can expect some wide variation in returns between miners. 

The premium that Southern California drivers are paying over the national average is at its highest ever, Jamie Court, president of the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog, said at a news conference in Los Angeles Wednesday. He was joined by billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer.

“The Golden State is getting gouged,” Court said. “The money that’s being made from the pockets of California gas consumers is lining the pockets of the oil refiners.”

California-blend gasoline is produced by refineries within the state and in a few other parts of the U.S. and the world.

Output of the blend by in-state refineries dropped to 6.5 million barrels in the week ended July 24, California Energy Commission data show.

While the refinery fire has contributed to high California pump prices, there are other factors such as the second-highest gasoline taxes in the country and environmental rules that boost costs, Braden Reddall, a spokesman at Chevron Corp., said in an e-mail.

“While it is easy for groups like Consumer Watchdog and individuals like Tom Steyer to take one factor in our earnings out of context, what can’t be taken out of context is the fact that many policies backed by Steyer are already increasing fuel prices for California consumers,” Reddall said.
Gasoline Cargoes

The high pump prices are temporary and should decline as gasoline cargoes arrive in greater numbers from abroad, Allison Mac, West Coast petroleum analyst at Gasbuddy, said in a phone interview Wednesday.

“Prices should be dropping at a higher rate than we have been seeing and that’s because of the imports,” she said. “The last couple of days, massive cargo ships arrived alleviating what was causing the prices to spike.”

 

At Costco, which is about the cheapest sellers of gasoline, prices have fallen 40¢ per gallon in the last five days which is about 10%. This suggests the supply shortage which has kept prices high is easing. While competition from imports may represent a challenge for refiners the continued weakness in oil prices is probably a more important factor.  

Sergio Marchionne had a funny thing to say about the $32,500 battery-powered Fiat 500e that his company markets in California as “eco-chic.” “I hope you don’t buy it,” he told his audience at a think tank in Washington in May 2014. He said he loses $14,000 on every 500e he sells and only produces the cars because state rules re­quire it. Marchionne, who took over the bailed-out Chrysler in 2009 to form Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, warned that if all he could sell were electric vehicles, he would be right back looking for another govern­ment rescue.

So who’s forcing Marchionne and all the other major automakers to sell mostly money-losing electric vehicles? More than any other person, it’s Mary Nichols. She’s run the California Air Resources Board since 2007, championing the state’s zero-emission-vehicle quotas and backing Pres­ident Barack Obama’s national mandate to double average fuel economy to 55 miles per gallon by 2025. She was chairman of the state air regulator once before, a generation ago, and cleaning up the famously smoggy Los Angeles skies is just one accomplish­ment in a four-decade career.

Nichols really does intend to force au­tomakers to eventually sell nothing but electrics. In an interview in June at her agency’s heavy-duty-truck laboratory in downtown Los Angeles, it becomes clear that Nichols, at age 70, is pushing regula­tions today that could by midcentury all but banish the internal combustion engine from California’s famous highways. “If we’re going to get our transportation system off petroleum,” she says, “we’ve got to get people used to a zero-emissions world, not just a little-bit-better version of the world they have now.”

This is tough love for automobile companies.  They will struggle to adapt and the costs will be high, at least initially, as we know from Sergio Marchionne’s remarks above.  However, cleaning up our planet has to be one of our most important policies.  It is not only a measure of our civilization, but also a key to our species’ long-term survival.

Mary Nichols is smart, successful and growing influence internationally.

Here policy on fuels is another long-term blow for the crude oil industry.     

After reporting its lowest profit since 2009 and cutting in half its plans for buybacks this quarter, Exxon Mobil’s vice president of investor relations Jeffrey J. Woodbury told analysts on a conference call: ‘‘Fundamentally, we’re committed to our shareholders to continue to provide a reliable and growing dividend.”

Said Chevron Corp. chief financial officer Patricia E. Yarrington on her company’s earnings call: “We said we would cover the dividend from free cash flow in 2017. We stand by that commitment.”

Chevron is paying almost 5 percent of its share price in dividends, the most since 1992 and near the highest above 10- year Treasury yields in data going back to 1991. It’s one of 19 Energy companies in the S&P 500 with dividend yields above 10- year notes, and in recent weeks it exceeded Verizon Communications Inc. as the highest yielding blue chip in the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

Can’t you almost taste the salt-water taffy, kids? Like others who have addressed the “are we there yet” question in recent months, Martin Adams at Wells Fargo offers a less-than-satisfying answer: not quite yet, kids.

 

The Energy sector offers an interesting perspective on the motivations of investors in purchasing shares over the last number of years. Often the size of the buyback program has been a more alluring factor than the dividend. The low interest rate environment has played a role in this preference and helps to throw light on why the security of Energy companies’ dividends are receiving less attention than the fact that they will be buying less of their shares. 

America's Energy rebirth is the gift that keeps on giving for the economy. But this year, it's more about construction than drilling holes in the ground.

While the collapse in oil and gas prices since the middle of last year caused Energy companies to slash investment in oil wells, Thursday's report on second-quarter GDP showed an interesting dynamic taking shape — investment in factories has been running full bore.

It may be surprising on the surface, given that manufacturing has simmered down this year on the heels of a weaker global economy, but spending on all types of production facilities increased at a 65 percent annualized pace in the second quarter. That was almost enough to offset a 68 percent plunge in investment in wells and mines that marked the biggest drop in 29 years.

Outlays for factory-related structures jumped even more from January through March -- surging at a 95 percent pace. Over the last four quarters, investment in plants increased an average 64 percent, the strongest since records began in 1958.

We have heard far more about slowdowns in the oil and gas industries, and obviously not just in the USA.  However, is this surge in factories evidence that the benefits of cheaper Energy are now beginning to be realised? 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

The key is the locations of the pads: Thync believes it's found the right target areas to tweak your brain's natural stress responses in one direction or the other. One strip is designed to produce a calming effect ("calm vibe") while the other strip makes you feel more alert ("Energy vibe"). And each "vibe" also has three sub-categories within it, varying in intensity and length of time.

It's like choosing a workout program, only instead of doing squats or lunges, the technology does the work for you. You just sit there and enjoy the results.

If this all sounds pretty far-out, like something a burned-out space junkie would be using in an 80's-era sci-fi novel, we completely understand. But for me, it works exactly as advertised, either relaxing or energizing me (or both) – not only while I'm using it, but for several hours afterwards.

Skeptics will also be quick to question whether Thync is just an expensive placebo effect. And while this is only one person's experience and opinion – take it as you will – I don't see how there's any way that's the case with me. If this is a placebo, then all the pot, caffeine and meditation I've ever tried must be as well.

This product would appear to claim many of the same benefits as electroshock treatment but with more nuanced application and without the amnesia associated with the more violent treatment. Thync is still a privately held company but if the product does as it says and represents a non-chemical treatment for stress and lack of motivation then an IPO will be a potentially attractive proposition. 

The scenario Mr. Faber outlines reflects one of our underlying beliefs, which is that the commodity boom of the first decade of the new century has spurred a significant commodity output expansion, fueled by the easy money policies of the United States, and now followed Europe, Japan and China. The capacity expansion is leading to a long-term decline in commodity prices that will benefit consumers rather than producers. This trend is long-term, and at times may appear not to be working because of near-term news and economic events. However, over 5- and 10-year periods, macro trends will drive investment returns. 

In a presentation we gave at a 2010 Decision Strategies Oilfield Breakfast meeting, we offered this view on the macro trend for Energy. We suggested that the past trend that benefitted Energy producers would shift to benefitting Energy consumers. For example, petrochemical companies benefit from lower-priced and readily-available natural gas and natural gas liquids supplies while producers struggle with extremely low natural gas prices. In that presentation, we attempted to crystalize our view by suggesting an investment trade for the next decade even though we were no longer in the business of researching and recommending stocks at that time. Our suggested trade was to buy Honeywell (HON-NYSE) and sell ExxonMobil (XOM-NYSE). THIS SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AN INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATION.] We decided to see how this trade has developed. The chart in Exhibit 9 shows the stock prices for the past five years, in which Honeywell has outperformed ExxonMobil. 

Our point in bringing up this trade is to highlight that what often appears evident in the near-term about industries and companies often changes as time enables new fundamentals to play out. In this case, remember that in 2010 the Energy industry had just emerged from the 2008 financial crisis and 2009 recession that cut Energy demand and caused oil and gas prices to collapse. In 2010, oil prices had rebounded and were on their way to multiple years of oil prices of $100 a barrel. Remember when the head of Chevron (CVX-NYSE) described $100-a-barrel oil as “the new $20-a-barrel oil”? Presently, that assumption appears questionable, but it is quite possible the statement may still prove accurate. If not, then the future for oil and gas will not be like the past. The challenge is to determine what the future might look like and how best to capitalize on changing Energy industry and investment trends. 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

The Supply Inelasticity Meets Rising Demand bull market that began in 2002/2003 succeeded in delivering additional supply and perhaps more importantly the capacity to increase supply. More than any other factor this has contributed to the decline in prices evident in the industrial metal complex as well as Energy futures. 

For nearly a decade David and I have been banging the drum that unconventional oil and gas would be game changers for the Energy sector and that consumers would be the greatest beneficiaries. Nothing has happened to change that view.  

There’s bullish talk about a coming pick-up in global economic growth, but for the moment, the signals are negative. Trends in the global economy look increasingly ominous.

Global trade is sluggish. In the first four months of the year, it rose only 2 per cent in volume terms, fell 12 per cent in dollar terms, year-on-year. Exports of Asian countries that are particularly sensitive indicators are looking awful.

Investment in expanding productive capacity is weak. The gap between new orders and stocks held by manufacturers is the poorest in three years.

Inflation is trending downwards in the US, Europe, China and Japan, with the rise in consumer prices in purchasing-power terms down over the past two years from 3 per cent to 1.2 per cent.

The OECD – the think-tank of mature economies – has cut its forecast for growth this year from 3.7 per cent to 3.1. The US is only expected to grow 1.1 per cent according to the Atlanta Fed’s latest GDP Now model. Europe and Japan are forecast to deliver minimal growth, while the most dynamic constituent of the world economy, China, is losing momentum.

Of course, there are some positive factors to counter the gloom. The fall in oil prices, by improving users‟ spending power, is adding 0.25 percentage points to economic growth. Central banks show no sign of retreating from their extreme money and credit creation policies to stimulate growth. In the US unemployment continues to fall, wage gains have started to gain traction, the housing market is looking better.

This is an interesting section and Martin Spring gives plenty of reasons why he still thinks global GDP growth will remain weak for many more years.  He could be right and obviously no one knows for sure.  I have repeatedly said in recent months that if may take two or three more years before we see a clear improvement in global growth.  Fortunately, the more enlightened governments and central bankers understand the challenge.  They are also addressing it, from the USA to India and obviously many more countries. 

They are also doing so in an environment of globalisation and accelerating technological innovation.  These changes are not without significant challenges, but the long-term benefits are likely to be far greater.  We already see this in so many areas, from the development of increasingly influential corporate Autonomies, to lower Energy costs, and previously unimaginable developments in biotechnology.  This is not just a limited or theoretical net gain for mankind.  Look at the increasing growth in the world’s middle classes over the last decade and counting.         

Martin Spring's On Target is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

“We’ve been talking with the national labs about it,” she says, noting the Department of Energy has a new loan guarantee program for advanced nuclear reactors. “There’s really good buy-in from DOE for developing a wide range of technologies.”

Even if all goes well, Dewan says, it will take at least a decade to develop a commercial molten salt reactor. She’s optimistic it will happen and welcomes the work of other nuclear startups.

“It’s so cool how much new development is occurring,” says Dewan, the grown-up version of the sixth grader who managed to produce light by connecting a water wheel to a generator. “It makes me excited for the industry.”

 

I posted a similar article from the Brookings Institute in February  which also talked about the potential of new reactor designs to change the nuclear industry beyond recognition. These are big ideas and will require big money to help realise them but the potential for a truly ground breaking innovation is worth the investment. The problem right now is that there is not a great deal of appetite for Energy investment in any shape as oil prices trend lower and budgets are slashed.  

In some ways, India has been preparing for a deal for several months, re-engaging Iran at the highest levels. Since February, the Indian national security advisor, transport minister and foreign secretary have traveled to Iran, and the foreign minister intended to do the same until her meeting was postponed. Most recently, Prime Minister Narendra Modi met with President Hassan Rouhani on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Ufa, Russia last week. He reiterated an invitation for Rouhani to visit India and said he looked forward to visiting Iran as well.

India never stopped engaging with Iran and some of the recent trips may have taken place even in the absence of the deal. There are certain imperatives for the relationship that make it important for India regardless (mentioned below). Furthermore, after spending its first year focused on India’s immediate neighborhood, the Asia-Pacific and the G-7, the Modi government has made clear its intention to “look west” over its second year, including with high-level trips to Central Asia (completed), Israel, Palestine, Jordan, and Turkey (for the G20 summit). This engagement becomes easier and more crucial for Delhi with the Vienna deal, which has implications for India in the Energy, economic and geopolitical spheres.

And 

Indian oil and gas companies have been active in Iran in the past – albeit not without problems – and they will likely consider returning. State-owned oil and gas company ONGC has been trying to win the rights to develop a block in the Persian Gulf that it had discovered years ago. A delegation of petroleum ministry and state-owned Energy company officials visited Iran in the spring to explore other opportunities. In the private sector, Reliance Industries, which had investments in and exported refined products to Iran, might also take another look at upstream projects and the possibility of resuming exports of petroleum products. At its peak in 2008-09, India was exporting over $1 billion worth of petroleum products to Iran; after Reliance stopped exporting, there was a sharp decline in that figure to less than $50 million in recent years.

 

As a major consumer of Energy products and with very little in the way of domestic resources India has had little choice but to engage with Iran throughout its period of isolation. Iran will be keen to develop its export markets in order to boost income and potentially displace some of its regional competitors. Both China and India represent obvious growth markets. 

Imagine parking your $300 million boat for months out in the open sea, with well-paid mechanics hovering around it and the engine running.

The Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea have become a garage for deepwater drillships -- at a cost of about $70,000 a day each. It’s either that or send your precious rig to a scrapyard.

The dilemma underscores how an offshore industry that geared upfor an oil boom is grappling with a bust. Rig owners are putting equipment aside at unprecedented numbers as customers including ConocoPhillips pull back from higher-cost deepwater exploration. That’s helped make Transocean Ltd. and Ensco Plc two of the three worst performers in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index over the past year.

“Most contractors have never seen an environment like this, where demand is falling as quickly as it is,” David Smith, an analyst at Heikkinen Energy Advisors in Houston, said in a phone interview. “It’s been a big headache, and the problem is that we’re not halfway through.”

A growing glut of newly built exploration vessels looked worrisome enough before the oil rout. Now it’s beginning to look disastrous.

Shipyards continue to roll out new units to meet orders made during the boom, but the rig providers may not need them anymore. As contracts expire, many producers may not renew them, and some are being canceled.

A big problem for all crude oil producers is the speed with which the oil price slumped.  Of course it has happened before and the plunge was even more dramatic in 2008.  However, prices recovered relatively quickly because OPEC producers reduced supplies and others followed this lead. Speculators also bought crude oil.

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

All that being said, it is somewhat surprising that the wholesale-related MLP stock prices are soft, despite decent margins and overall stable fuel demand and strong profitability.  For example, CrossAmerica Partners LP (linked with CST) is down 29% from last year's high, strong Global Partners LP is down 26%, and Sunoco LP is down 38%.

Granted, equity supply continues, as indicated by the initial public offerings of GPM Investments and Empire Petroleum Partners. However, these are relatively small equity offerings of $100 million apiece, not normally enough to kill the overall equity side, unless the demand for these equities has tapered off considerably. What might be wrong with this seemingly good picture for downstream MLPs? Let me offer some possibilities:

Oil prices. Should oil prices drop much further than now assumed by the marketplace, all downstream petroleum margins could suffer over time. Most vulnerable might be U.S. refiner margins, which are currently “to the moon,” because of the wide WTI-Brent crude-oil spread and the lunacy that U.S. producers cannot export their crude oil, yet U.S. refiners can export products at world-market prices--ah, heaven! Lower oil prices could impact margins in general as working capital requirements decline, and, more importantly, the 1% discount for prompt pay offered by branded refiners becomes worth less to middleman distributors. Perhaps Wall Street simply feels the “bloom is off the rose” for anything oil related for now.

Are purchase multiples too high? There has been spirited competition for M&A deals from MLPs, but equally from refiner-marketers such as Marathon/Speedway and Shell, as well as from many solid retail oriented players who want to use their strong cash flows and credit lines to expand, yet find organic growth too slow. Thus, there is a huge urge to merge by many players, as on Wall Street in general these days. MLPs have the absolute need to grow their dividends but, depending on their complicated structures, have quantifiable EBITDA multiple limits as to what they can pay and still have the acquisitions be accretive to earnings. And, as we all know, not all acquisitions work as planned, so the need can increase to acquire more to stay ahead of earnings. Many are fortunate because the interesting web of MLPs, general partners, sponsors, long-term financing vs. short-term financing, and lines of credit give them a smorgasbord of financing options while most interest rates are at historic lows. It’s a chief financial officer's best dream--or nightmare.

Interest rates. For whatever reason, unforeseen right now, might interest rates go higher than anticipated?

 

Selling pressure in the Energy sector has been indiscriminate with major producers, service companies and pipelines deteriorating. A great deal of bad news is being priced in, not least since oil prices have so far failed to recover. An additional question on many minds will be whether Saudi Arabia will be more or less likely to continue to pump record volumes with the removal of sanctions on Iran. 

Powerful speculators have launched an unprecedented attack on the world gold market, driving prices to a five-year low as commodities wilt and the US Federal Reserve prepares to tighten monetary policy.

Spot prices slumped by more than 4pc to $1,086 an ounce in overnight trading after anonymous funds sold 57 tonnes of gold in Shanghai and New York, choosing the moment of minimum market liquidity in what appears to have been a synchronized strike intended to smash confidence.

Spot prices slumped by more than 4pc to $1,086 an ounce in overnight trading after anonymous funds sold 57 tonnes of gold in Shanghai and New York, choosing the moment of minimum market liquidity in what appears to have been a synchronized strike intended to smash confidence.

Ross Norman, a veteran gold analyst at brokers Sharps Pixley, said sellers dumped 7,600 contracts covering 24 tonnes on the Globex exchange in New York in a two-minute span after it opened late on Sunday night.

A further 33 tonnes were sold at almost exactly the same time in Shanghai. The combined hit of 57 tonnes in such a short period is an extraordinary event in the world’s relatively small gold market.

“They choose the optimal moment in the early morning and when Japan was closed for a holiday to get the biggest bang for the buck. It was clearly ‘short’ traders using leverage to trigger (technical) stops,” he said.

The price later regained some of its ground, allegedly as the profiteers cashed in jackpot gains on options that they also had. “It was a trade within a trade,” said Mr Norman.

The slide came as the Bloomberg commodity index hit a 13-year low, dragged down by the slump in base metals and Energy. Gold has fared better than other commodities over recent months - trading on its safe-haven status during the Greek crisis and China’s equity crash - but it now risks being sucked into the vortex as well.

Michael Lewis, commodities chief at Deutsche Bank, said the “fair value” for gold is around $750. This is based on an index of eight indicators, such as oil, copper, income per capita and equity prices, that dates back to the early 1970s. Gold tends to “mean revert” over time.

This is one of the best articles on gold that I have seen for a very long time.  I commend it to all subscribers and have also posted a PDF version in the Subscriber’s Area for your convenience. 

The latest bear raid for gold described above is fascinating.  The simultaneous selling of 57 tonnes, of which 24 tonnes were on the Globex exchange in New York, and 33 tonnes in Shanghai, was a massively well organised raid. 

Moreover, in China’s command economy, I assume that the Shanghai sale could not have occurred without government knowledge and probable participation.  This is very likely because the sale came shortly after China’s central bank issued the suspect and bearish figure of 1,658 tonnes in bullion reserves. 

This detailed and chart-illustrated analysis continues in the Subscriber’s Area, where a PDF of The Telegraph article is also posted.  

The rout in commodities deepened with prices touching the lowest since 2002 as the prospect of higher U.S. interest rates sent gold tumbling.

Raw materials are losing favor with investors as the dollar gains amid signals from Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen that the central bank may raise rates this year on the back of an improving U.S. economy. Higher borrowing costs curb the attractiveness of commodities such as gold, which doesn’t pay interest or give returns like assets including bonds and equities.

The Bloomberg Commodity Index dropped as much as 1.4 percent, falling for a fifth day in the longest stretch of declines since March. Gold futures sank to the weakest in more than five years while industrial metals, grains, Brent crude and U.S. natural gas also slid as a measure of the dollar climbed to the highest since April 13.

Expectations for global GDP growth are cautious for the second half of 2015, not least because of slumping commodity prices.  However, growth could also improve given stimulative monetary policies and cheaper Energy prices at least six-and-a-quarter years after the worst credit crisis recession since the 1930s.  It usually takes at least this long for economies to recover from a cycle of extensive corporate and private deleveraging, leading to falling tax revenues, as we have been seeing.  

Halcon Resources Corp. almost ran into trouble with its banks in June 2013. And again in March 2014. And in February 2015.

Each time, the shale driller came close to violating debt limits set by its lenders, endangering a credit line that provided as much as $1.05 billion in much-needed cash. Each time, Halcon’s banks, led by JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co., loosened their restrictions, allowing Halcon to keep borrowing.

That kind of patience may be coming to an end. Bank regulators have issued warnings on the risks involved in lending to U.S. drillers, threatening a cash crunch in an industry that’s more dependent than ever on other people’s money. Wall Street has been one of the biggest allies of the shale revolution, bankrolling thousands of wells from Texas to North Dakota. The question is how that will change with oil prices down by half since last year to $50.36 a barrel.

“Lenders in general are increasing pressure on oil companies either to raise more equity or do some sort of transaction to pay down their credit lines and free up extra cash,” said Jimmy Vallee, a partner in the Energy mergers and acquisitions practice at law firm Paul Hastings LLP in Houston.

The benefits of lower oil prices, while significant, are spread thinly throughout economies.  In contrast, the problems for producers of oil and gas at lower prices are considerable and therefore highly visible.  This can have a knock-on negative effect, affecting banks with loans to the Energy sector, the number of people employed in the oil and gas industries, tax revenues from these sectors, and economic slumps in previously booming oil towns.  

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

India has made an exceptional commitment to solar Energy by raising its 2022 target five-fold to 100GW and its Renewable Energy target to 175GW. The government has announced an unprecedented policy push and states are providing the necessary infrastructure. Annual investments in solar could surpass investment in coal by 2019-20, with USD 35bn committed by global players. For local IPPs, solar has to be an inherent part of their expansion strategy, as RE obligations become strictly enforceable and cost of coal power increases. NTPC, Adani and RPWR are ahead in this development cycle which  adds 10-15% to our current valuations. NTPC is our top pick.

We raise our solar power forecast by 240%
Global majors have committed USD 35bn+ to the Indian solar sector. By 2020, annual solar power capacity additions and investments could surpass those in coal power projects. We are raising our solar power forecasts by 240% to 34GW by 2020. This is on the back of strong commissioning (4.5GW), even stronger pipeline - under construction (~5.1GW), and new projects (~15GW). By then, renewables could account for a significant 20% of power capacities in India, per our forecast. Private sector interest is decisively moving towards solar from coal power, and we foresee numerous opportunities of fund-raising, yield co-structuring and M&A activity.

RE can reach 20% of capacity but we see challenges to higher penetration
(1) Transmission constraints and integration of diurnal power into the grid are risks, without peak-load management capability. Solar absorption in Rajasthan could see challenges like wind in Tamil Nadu, given policy target of 25GW solar vs. peak-demand of 11GW. (2) A further risk is the enforcement of RE purchase obligations (RPOs) given weak finances of state distribution cos, and hence large-scale absorption of solar could be a concern (INR 170bn additional burden by 2020E). (3) Other issues include financing, land acquisition, limited domestic manufacturing, and returns/reliability of baseline data. 

Impact on the thermal power producers 
Solar could have a significant impact on day power rates, given that generation peaks between 9am and 6pm. In turn, this could reduce the coal requirement by ~8% or 70mnt by 2020E, largely impacting the highest cost of power, i.e., imported coal – leading to large savings (~USD 17bn/pa).

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

India has highly favourably demographics but if that dividend is to be realised the country needs to embark on a long-term policy of industrialisation. Narendra Modi’s government understands what has to be done and is gradually making the changes needed to unlock India’s considerable development potential. 

On its path to industrialisation China built huge numbers of coal fired power stations which facilitated growth but poisoned the air. It is now faced with an environment challenge that is proving expensive to correct. India has the potential to  partially circumvent at least these challenges by taking advantage of improvements in technology that were not available to China when it began to industrialise. 

While there really was nothing unique in the observations they shared about the investment process or the desirable criteria, the scary fact was (is) the volume of private equity money seeking a home in the Energy industry. According to Mr. Ryder, Energy private equity investing as a percentage of total Energy sector merger and acquisition activity had climbed from under 2% in 2000 to over 20% in 2014. During the first quarter of 2015, the Energy private equity funds were investing at that slightly greater than 20% rate until the announcement of the $70 billion BG Group (BG-NYSE) and Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A-NYSE) deal. We have not yet seen updated figures so we don’t know how the current state of the industry may have changed in the second quarter.

As the First Reserve article pointed out, the increased size of the investment pools forced the group to abandon its proven strategy of making smaller investments in smaller enterprises. First Reserve was forced to increase the size of its investments, meaning it needed to invest in larger deals. This investment shift is an economy of scale issue. To hold to its original investment philosophy, First Reserve would have had to make many more investments in each fund stretching the human resources of its investment team. It would have also potentially diluted the potential investment returns anticipated when putting the fund together, although given the performance of those funds a broader pool of investments might have provided them with better results. At the same time it was being forced to alter its investment strategy, First Reserve may also have been a victim of the “feeding frenzy” among Energy private equity funds and non-Energy new entrant private equity funds that could have inflated deal valuations. That feeding frenzy may have been the biggest problem if one believes that since the financial crisis in 2008-2009, the Energy industry has been in a long-term downturn, just as happened during the 1980’s. We remain concerned about the magnitude of private equity money seeking investment opportunities in the Energy business. We concluded our prior article on Energy private equity funds with the following observations, which we still believe are correct.

“The uniformity of thinking among private equity players is a bit scary. Group-thought is usually not a successful strategy. The volume of public capital is not only surprising, but discouraging if one believes the industry needs to experience pain before a true recovery can begin. Lastly, in looking at the presenters and the audience, there were very few present that experienced the 1980’s forced re-structuring of the Energy business following the bullish experience of the 1970’s. In our discussions that day, we encountered another old-timer who referenced the 1980’s downturn starting in 1982, three years before when most who look at the industry’s history think it began. We were there then, and this guy had it exactly right. This industry is headed for significant change.” In our view, the industry’s changes are just now beginning to emerge. 

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area. 

The Energy sector has gone through a decade long investment cycle predicated on developing previously uneconomic resources that were justifiable at a price structure above $40 and more often above $60. It is reasonable to expect that more than a little of that investment capital was used to bring resources into production with a considerably higher price point. As a result the natural progression for a sector going through a consolidation is rationalisation. 

Mexico waited 77 years to invite foreign oil producers back into its borders. That was one year too many.

The move to lure tens of billions of dollars from the likes of Exxon Mobil Corp. will be put to the test for the first time at an oilfield auction on Wednesday. With oil prices down by about half since last year, five of 38 potential bidders including Glencore Plc, Noble Energy Inc. and even Mexico’s state-owned oil producer have pulled out.

President Enrique Pena Nieto moved to end the state monopoly after poor drilling infrastructure and technology failed to reverse a decade-long production decline that reduced government revenue. To lure investments now, Mexico will probably get a much smaller share of profits than it would have a year ago.

“They shaped expectations at a $100-per-barrel market and we are way off that now,” Wilbur Matthews, chief executive officer of San Antonio-based Vaquero Global Investment, which oversees more than $100 million of assets including oil-producer bonds, said by phone July 10.

 

Favourable geology doesn’t just stop at the border between Texas and Mexico. Officials must have been looking on with envy as the shale boom took off in the US south west. Mexico’s state owned oil company dealt with declining output. Today’s news of Iran reaching an agreement to end sanctions and increase oil exports is another reason for Mexico to ramp production. The country will not get the same price they were hoping for from producing unconventional supplies and boosting offshore but it has little choice but to develop these reserves if the hole in its budget is to be repaired. 

I'm looking for your view again on the Canadian Energy sector.  I obviously am aware of the effect technology has had on the shale boom etc...I do disagree with most assertions that there is a flood of supply in oil at these price levels.  Anyway, aside from that- how do we go into this massive global GDP growth phase and not require an abundance of resources of all kinds?  Technology has brought on supply but they require much higher prices to break even.  Help me reconcile how we have this huge growth backdrop and yet the market is pricing in disaster levels in Canada?  Is the Energy sector forever dead or is this a tremendous buying opportunity?   Thanks as always. Hope you and your family are well.

Thank you for a question sure to be of interest to the Collective. My family are all in rude health thank you. The oil sector has a lot of moving parts so let’s try to pick it apart. 

Saudi Arabia is pumping oil like it is going out of fashion and in a sense it is. The evolution of solar in particular, but also other renewables, batteries, electric cars, hydrogen fuel cells and the migration of work onto the cloud mean that oil now has challengers both as a transport fuel and for heating. 

Still, hydrogen-fuelled cars have two main advantages over their battery-powered rivals, said Salim Morsy, a New-York based analyst for Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

“They are faster to refuel and have much longer ranges than electric ones,” the analyst said. “It can take just five minutes to refuel a hydrogen car for a range of 400 miles, compared to up to a seven hour charge for an electric vehicle to travel just 200 miles.”

Linde says Energiepark Mainz could help put an end to the criticism that hydrogen fuel cells are only marginally more environmentally friendly than traditional combustion vehicles, and allow the gas to be extracted anywhere there’s wind and water. BMW AG is also starting tests of a vehicle powered by hydrogen this month.

 

In 1874 Jules Verne hypothesised in the Mysterious Island “water will one day be employed as fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen of which it is constituted will be used”. It’s been a long time coming and we are not there yet but producing hydrogen cheaply and cleanly represents a major breakthrough in the potential for it to be reused as a transport fuel. Toyota putting the Mirai into production represents a major bet that the technology has reached commercial utility.   

The significance of the oil sands on global oil supply cannot be ignored. Over the past five years, oil sands output has grown by 1.1 mmb/d, fully one-fifth of the total oil production growth for North America. The impact of lower oil prices on the oil sands cannot be missed. Early in 2014, Western Canada Select, a heavy oil price market, was selling at $86 a barrel. By the end of March, that marker was trading below $30 a barrel. This is when, according to oil industry consultant Rystad Energy, new oil sands projects require a price of $100 a barrel in order to breakeven. What’s been the impact of the price decline on the Canadian oil industry?

In February, Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A-NYSE) withdrew its application to build a new 200,000 barrels per day (b/d) mine at Pierre River, north of Fort McMurray. In May, the company announced it would delay for several years a new 80,000 b/d in situ oil sands project at Carmon Creek near Peace River. The significance of these projects is highlighted when one realizes that Shell currently operates 225,000 b/d of oil sands production. Other projects are being delayed as companies plan to bring much smaller in situ projects into production at a delayed pace in order to manage their cash flow and capital investment requirements.

A June 16th report from Ernst & Young LLP projects a 30% decline in Canadian oil sands spending, bringing this year’s investment to $23 billion, down from an expected $33 billion. The result of this spending decline and the announcements by several producers to stop or delay new oil sands mines and in situ projects means total oil production will be 17% lower by 2030 compared to the target output in the 2014 forecast provided by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP).

In addition to cutting new investment, oil sands producers are looking at ways to cut their operating costs to help improve their breakeven prices. Suncor Energy (SU-NYSE), a significant oil sands producer, has said it plans to replace 800 dump truck drivers with automated trucks at its oil sands mines. That move, which is a huge boost for autonomous vehicle technology, is projected to save the company C$200,000 per driver.

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

Decisions to postpone or cancel spending on new projects has long-term consequences for oil supply growth forecasts not least when this situation is not limited to Alberta. Oil and gas companies are cutting expenditure wherever they can in order to remain profitable in what could be a persistently low price environment, at least relative to the levels that prevailed until a year ago. 

U.S. coal shares jumped after the Supreme Court struck down the Obama administration’s mercury and acid gases power plant rule, saying it hadn’t considered the billions of dollars in costs before issuing the rule.

Arch Coal Inc. jumped as much as 19 percent, Peabody Energy Corp. climbed 15 percent and Alpha Natural Resources Inc. was up 14 percent in intraday trading after the ruling was announced Monday.

The court’s decision calls into question an Environmental Protection Agency rule that targets mercury and acid gases. The rule has led to the closing of dozens of coal-fired power plants over the last two years.

 

It’s been a long time since coal caught a break and a great deal of bad news is already in the price. Coal is dirty, antiquarian, low tech and contributes to pollution but is cheap and abundant.  Over the last few years investors and regulators have concentrated on the former points and forgot the latter ones. Coal is the feed stock for a substantial portion of electricity production and today’s decision will mean that fewer power stations in the USA will need to be closed as a result of stringent regulations. 

In conventional water splitters, the hydrogen and oxygen catalysts often require different electrolytes with different pH — one acidic, one alkaline — to remain stable and active. “For practical water splitting, an expensive barrier is needed to separate the two electrolytes, adding to the cost of the device,” Wang explained.

“Our water splitter is unique because we only use one catalyst, nickel-iron oxide, for both electrodes,” said graduate student Haotian Wang, lead author of the study. “This bi-functional catalyst can split water continuously for more than a week with a steady input of just 1.5 volts of electricity. That’s an unprecedented water-splitting efficiency of 82 percent at room temperature.”

Wang and his colleagues discovered that nickel-iron oxide, which is cheap and easy to produce, is actually more stable than some commercial catalysts made of expensive precious metals.

The key to making a single catalyst possible was to use lithium ions to chemically break the metal oxide catalyst into smaller and smaller pieces. That “increases its surface area and exposes lots of ultra-small, interconnected grain boundaries that become active sites for the water-splitting catalytic reaction,” Cui said. “This process creates tiny particles that are strongly connected, so the catalyst has very good electrical conductivity and stability.” 

The challenge for a hydrogen fuelled economy has always been in delivering the gas at an acceptable price. More recently the fact the majority of hydrogen is produced from natural gas has acted against it as a potential solution because of environmental concerns. Technological innovation has the potential to change that scenario if a scalable, low Energy solution can be delivered.

Toyota is making a big bet on hydrogen fuel cells with its Mirai vehicle due for release this summer. Removing a reliance on natural gas from the fuel cycle would represent a major selling point for the vehicles. 

One trader told Reuters that by entering bids on screen that no seller is in a position meet, a bidder could artificially push up prices.

"The way you do that is by the timing and size of those parcels," the trader said.

As the market is not particularly liquid, bids and offers help inform pricing on the API 4 index, which is calculated using data gathered by Argus and IHS McCloskey.

Traders said that the concerns over artificially high bids pushing up coal prices on the API 4 index had cut the volumes traded.

API 4 trade volumes between January and May fell by almost a third from a year earlier, data published by the CME and ICE exchanges showed.

The index is the world's third largest behind the API 2 benchmark for northern European coal markets and globalCOAL's Newcastle benchmark index for thermal coal in the Asia-Pacific.

 

Coal has been a benighted sector as Energy prices have declined and regulations tightened in an effort to reduce emissions. The possibility that HFT type trading practices have extended to the illiquid commodity markets is not a welcome development and suggests short-term volatility may increase. 

US Coal prices remain in an accelerating downtrend and a clear upward dynamic will be required to pressure shorts. The activism of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and low cost of natural gas are at least partly responsible for the underperformance of US prices relative to global benchmarks.

Solar developers say the introduction of such contracts, which would protect investors from the expected depreciation of the rupee over the next 25 years, would overcome one of the last remaining obstacles to new investments and cement India’s position as the next big destination for renewable Energy groups.

“The scale-up will happen extremely rapidly,” says Tejpreet Chopra, chief executive of Bharat Light & Power, which plans to quintuple its wind and solar output in India to 1,000 megawatts (1GW) in the next few years. “The good news is that at least the government is showing intent. In order to do this scale of projects, we’re going to need foreign capital.”

Piyush Goyal, the minister responsible for power and renewable Energy, launched bold plans a year ago to provide electricity 24 hours a day for all Indians by 2019, partly from ever cheaper green power: the plan for the solar sector is to spend $100bn to raise capacity from just under 4GW today to 100GW by 2022. An estimated 400m Indians lack basic access to electricity. Coal remains India’s most important Energy source, supplying more than half of all power stations.

According to a graph in the article above, only China, Japan, the USA, and UK will be adding more solar capacity in 2015.  Moreover, with Narendra Modi leading India, this rapid development will continue for many more years.

To grow rapidly, India needs vastly more Energy.  This is certainly possible and, preferably, India will be able to phase out most of its reliance on coal within the next 20 years.  In today’s world, good leadership can modernise a third-world economy in a little over a generation.  

The market is at an interesting juncture. The S&P is up less than 2% this year and been largely rangebound since late last year. A somewhat lengthier range after a particularly consistent advance suggests supply and demand have come back into equilibrium. Among the arguments propounded by the cautious camp are that valuations, not least the CAPE have increased and earnings have deteriorated. There is fear that the Greek issue will spill over into a bigger problem and that the Fed may raise interest rates in September. 

Among the more optimistic arguments are that banks are outperforming, technological innovation is delivering new products which have the potential to improve productivity and Energy prices are less of a headwind. Global central banks are also flooding the market with liquidity but the Fed has stopped adding new money.

Applications for U.S. unemployment benefits remained below 300,000 for a 14th straight week, a sign of labor market strength that will help fuel U.S. growth.

Jobless claims rose by 2,000 to 279,000 in the week ended June 6, a Labor Department report showed Thursday in Washington. The median forecast of 48 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for 275,000. The four-week average of initial applications also crept up.

The data indicate employers are retaining workers in anticipation of a pickup in demand this quarter after a slow start to the year. Combined with a spring spurt in payrolls, the employment picture bodes well for household spending, the biggest part of the economy.

“There’s not much going on in the way of layoffs, they remain low,” said Joshua Shapiro, chief U.S. economist at Maria Fiorini Ramirez Inc. in New York, who projected claims of 280,000. “The labor market is reasonably good. Consumer spending is getting support from the labor market clearly and from some income growth.”

Another report Thursday showed a pickup in May retail sales. The Commerce Department said purchases last month jumped 1.2 percent, reflecting broad-based gains from auto dealers to clothing retailers to department stores, after a 0.2 percent April gain.

Since the first week of March, applications for unemployment benefits have been below the 300,000 level that economists say is consistent with an improving job market.

This is encouraging since I have read that at least 40,000 people have been laid off in the US Energy industry over the last several months, mainly from the shale oil sector. 

Better economic figures since weak Q1 are certainly welcome although they have been pushing US 10-Yr Treasury yields higher, at least until today as we have just seen a downside key day reversal.  This suggests a temporary pause and consolidation before Treasury yields resume their recovery. 

This item continues in the Subscriber’s Area.

Daimler is entering into business in the field of stationary Energy storage plants with its one hundred percent subsidiary Deutsche ACCUmotive. The first industrial-scale lithium-ion unit is already on the grid and is being operated by the partner companies The Mobility House AG and GETEC Energie AG. For business with private customers in the area of Energy storage in Germany, Daimler AG is planning to collaborate with EnBW AG. Daimler is also aiming to enter into cooperation with other sales and distribution partners both in Germany and at international level. "Mercedes-Benz Energy storages provide the best confirmation that lithium-ion batteries Made in Germany have a viable future," says Harald Kröger, Head of Development Electrics/Electronics & E-Drive Mercedes-Benz Cars. "With our comprehensive battery expertise at Deutsche ACCUmotive we are accelerating the transition to sustainable Energy generation both on the road and in the field of power supply for companies and private households. The technology that has proven its worth over millions of kilometres covered in the most adverse conditions, such as extreme heat and cold, also offers the best credentials for stationary use. We have been gathering initial experience in this field since 2012."

Daimler was in the news last month for its introduction of driverless haulage vehicles to Nevada following the state’s legislation on autonomous vehicles. The company’s entry into the domestic and commercial Energy storage sectors is equally ground breaking and suggests it has ambitions of being a pioneer in the future of transportation and Energy storage. 

More importantly, when we look at total natural gas import volumes and the percentage originating from Canada, we can see (Exhibit 13) how important imports and Canada’s share were until total imports peaked in the winter of 2007-2008 and began to slide. As gas import volumes peaked, the Canadian share declined and other supply sources expanded, in particular LNG volumes from the Caribbean. In recent months, LNG and other gas supply sources declined, leaving Canadian pipeline gas as our sole import volumes.

The dilemma for Canada is that without either more rapid growth in U.S. natural gas consumption or a decline in U.S. gas output, Canada’s ability to ship more of its gas production to the U.S. will be capped, or possibly worse shrink. This is a reason why Canadian politicians need to work harder to open other export opportunities for its natural gas and oil output. Without them, Canada’s petroleum industry will face an extended period of depressed activity as it is highly likely that Canadian natural gas prices will remain depressed and volumes shipped out will show no growth, not a good outlook for either Canada’s economy or its petroleum industry.

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

The USA’s unconventional oil and gas revolution has done Canada no favours. A failure to develop additional export markets has left the country at the mercy of an explosion in supply from shale oil and gas wells in the USA and it will still be a number of years before even the most optimistic plans for additional export options are realised. This should be a national priority for such a resource dependent country but handwringing about the environmental consequences and continued dependence on a fickle US judiciary has delayed export projects. 

Mr Tsipras's article is a thinly-disguised warning that Greece may choose to default on roughly €330bn of debt in the biggest sovereign default ever, and pull out of the euro, rather than breech its key red lines.

The debts are mostly to European official creditors and the European Central Bank. The situation has become critical after depositors withdrew €800m from Greek banks in two days at the end of last week, heightening fears that capital controls may be imminent.

Mr Tsipras's choice of words also implies that Greece may turn its back on the Western security system, presumably by shifting into the orbit of Russia and China.

The article comes as Panagiotis Lafanzanis, the Energy minister and head of Syriza's powerful Left Platform, returns from Moscow after securing a provisional deal with Gazprom to build part of the "Turkish Stream" gas pipeline through Greece.

The EU is both an economic and political union. Much of the commentary has focused on the ramifications of Greece leaving the Euro, defaulting on its debts and refusing to engage with its creditors. On the political front, tighter relations with Europe’s geopolitical rivals represent an additional consideration since Greece is also a member of NATO. 

This article from GlobalSecurity.org highlights how Turkey controls the Bosporus, Sea of Marmara and the Dardanelles but ships exiting the strait from the Black Sea transit through both Turkish and Greek territory in the Aegean. Increasingly friendly relations between a tactically important NATO member and Russia will be a cause for concern. It is therefore open to question whether Europe’s geopolitical interests will trump economic considerations during continued tense negotiations with Greece. 

I am trialing your service. You speak in the daily service about your and David's favourite views. Could you tell me where I can find these and also could you recommend how I can get the best understanding of value from your site. Many thanks.

Thank you for taking the time to trial our service. FullerTreacyMoney is content rich so we understand that it may be overwhelming for new subscribers to figure out how best to use what we offer.

Every day we post a number of articles in Comment of the Day which we believe are of interest either in themselves or because they related to major issues or investment themes. We record a daily audio commentary to put what happened that day in context and to point our short-term movements in the market. As someone just getting acquainted with the Service I would suggest listening to one of the Friday Audios. This is when we put forward our longer-term outlook for the various different asset classes and would be the most accessible way of figuring out where we stand on various topics.   

I would also suggest playing around with the Chart Library. Add instruments you are interested in to your Favourites so you can monitor your portfolio and watch list. Our comprehensive globally oriented Chart Library is updated daily with close to 15000 stocks, bonds, indices, funds, currencies and commodities.

We also tell you exactly what we are doing with our own money both from a trading and investment perspective as it happens.

We spend a great deal of time identifying investment themes and have a strong record of being early. If you click on the Investment themes tab in the main menu (located in the middle of the black bar) you will be presented with two different category searches. Every article we write is categorised by whether it falls into one of our major themes (Energy, Technology, Precious Metals/Commodities, Autonomies, China, India, Japan etc.) as well as into individual “Tags”.

For example if you are interested in the broad China sector. The vast majority of the articles we write relating to the topic can be found under the China tab. If you are interested in an individual subject or company such as Citic Securities you can search the Tags for the name of the company or subject. You can also browse the Tags by clicking on one of the letters on the Investment Themes page.  

In late 2014, Global Bioenergies started up the fermentation unit for a pilot program to produce gaseous isobutane from renewable biomass sugars such as corn-derived glucose. Gaseous isobutane is a sort of raw material for the petrochemical industry that can then be refined into a variety of plastics, fuels and other applications.

The next step in the process was to run the material through a conditioning and purification process, allowing it to be collected and stored in liquid form under pressure. Some of it was then sent to Germany to be converted into isooctane fuel, creating a pure, 100 octane gasoline.
"To me this is a historic moment," says Global Bioenergies CEO Marc Delcourt. "It is the first time that we have produced real gasoline from plants."

Isooctane is currently used as an additive to improve fuel quality, but could also be used a stand-alone fuel. Audi calls the final, refined form of the fuel "e-benzin" and claims that it burns clean due to its lack of sulfur and benzene. Also, its high grade enables it to power engines using high compression ratios for more efficiency.

Audi will test the fuel composition and conduct engine tests to see how it performs before eventually trying it out in vehicle fleets. Delcourt says he could see it being used in consumer cars on a large scale "very soon."

"We thinking we're bringing green-ness to a field that desperately needs green-ness," says Rick Bockrath, vice president for chemical engineering at Global Bioenergies. "It's basically how we're moving away from an oil-based economy towards something that has a renewable, sustainable future to it."

 

This follows a story from a month ago talking about how Audi produced a diesel fuel from air and water through a chemical process. Today’s story is a further iteration of this concept.

In the last month we have also learned that artificial photosynthesis has been achieved. Here is a section from an article by Lynn Yarris for Lawrence Berkeley National Lab: 

Scientists with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and the University of California (UC) Berkeley have created a hybrid system of semiconducting nanowires and bacteria that mimics the natural photosynthetic process by which plants use the Energy in sunlight to synthesize carbohydrates from carbon dioxide and water. However, this new artificial photosynthetic system synthesizes the combination of carbon dioxide and water into acetate, the most common building block today for biosynthesis.

“We believe our system is a revolutionary leap forward in the field of artificial photosynthesis,” says Peidong Yang, a chemist with Berkeley Lab’s Materials Sciences Division and one of the leaders of this study. “Our system has the potential to fundamentally change the chemical and oil industry in that we can produce chemicals and fuels in a totally renewable way, rather than extracting them from deep below the ground.”

It’s not quite the Great Satan — at least, not yet. But it’s an enemy that the Iranian regime and the people can unite against

Now that Iran’s Islamic government is close to a nuclear deal with the US and other world powers, the traditional “death to America” slogan is losing its lustre but the loathing of Saudi Arabia is gaining appeal.

Though this is happening by accident more than design, driven by a stand-off in Yemen between Iranian and Saudi proxies, it is blissfully convenient for Iran’s rulers.

Iranians never learnt to hate America despite their leaders’ best efforts to whip up resentment. It certainly won’t grow easier to convince them of devious American plots if a nuclear accord is signed.

When it comes to Saudi Arabia, however, Shia Iranians are happy to bash their Sunni neighbour. Persian-Arab enmity goes back centuries; Iranian-American hostility is only a few decades old. “People in Iran love Americans, and Saudi Arabia is the one country that everyone hates,” one political analyst tells me. “If it’s not the Great Satan it’s only because it’s not that important.”

Indeed, in my own meetings in Iran, there are sometimes awkward moments: someone casually drops a disparaging remark about Arabs then realises I come from Lebanon and reassures me Iranians love the Lebanese but less so Gulf countries. In Lebanon, of course, Iran has Hizbollah, its most prized proxy.

I heard Saudi leaders denounced as “immature children” who bomb fellow Muslims in Yemen and join hands with jihadi terrorists in Syria and Iraq. It’s impossible to convince anyone that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis), which threatens the Saudi regime possibly even more than it threatens Iran, is not a Saudi creation. The notion that Saudi Arabia should reject an Iranian role in the affairs of other Arab states also meets with incredulity. A common language (Arabic) doesn’t give one country the right to claim authority over another, say Iranian officials.

Thanks to technology, the USA no longer has the same vital interests in the Middle East, although it would understandably like to prevent the region’s wars and terrorism from spreading westward.  If ongoing Sunni-Shia conflicts threaten the Middle East’s oil production, the USA can quickly ramp up its shale oil output, avoiding a repeat of recessions caused by earlier Energy crises.  

Many other countries could do the same.  If they follow the USA’s Energy policies, from shale oil and gas to solar-led renewables, in 20 to 30 years time the Middle will have the luxury of consuming all of its own oil and gas.

The FT article is posted in the Subscribers' Area.    

Looking somewhat like a giant reed gently swaying in the wind, the new Vortex bladeless wind-driven generator prototype produces electricity with very few moving parts, on a very small footprint, and in almost complete silence. Designed to reduce the visual and aural impact of traditional spinning-blade turbines, this new device takes advantage of the power contained in swirling vortices of air.

Many opponents of spinning wind turbines point to their supposed danger to birds and other flying animals, as well as their rather noisy operation and – particularly in commercial installations – their enormous size. Though these may well be excuses by those who prefer to stay with older electricity generating technologies that they know and trust, standard wind-driven turbines do have these issues and this tends to hold back their universal acceptance and use.

This is where the creators of the Vortex bladeless believe that their device has the advantage. A relatively compact unit, it relies on the oscillation of its reed-like mast in reaction to air vortices to move a series of magnets located in the joint near its base to generate electricity.

Though obviously not as efficient as a high-speed, directly wind-driven turbine, this is offset by the fact that the Vortex has fewer moving parts and is, according to the creators, up to 80 percent more cost effective to maintain. Coupled to the notion that it supposedly has a greater than 50 percent manufacturing cost advantage and a 40 percent reduction in its carbon footprint compared to standard wind turbines, the system also seems to offer direct economic advantages.

We've explored a number of bladeless wind-turbines before – the Solar Aero turbine being one (though, by definition, not really bladeless as it merely covered the spinning blades with a housing) and the Saphonianbeing another. The latter being more of a true bladeless "turbine," it still required hydraulic actuation of pistons to generate electricity, so its efficiency was probably not all that great (and, to be perfectly frank, it was not strictly a turbine either as it had no spinning parts).

The Vortex, on the other hand, is purported to take advantage of the swirling motion of wind and not direct force like the aforementioned units. This means that it can generate Energy from the repeating pattern of vortices (known as the Kármán vortex street), which are generated as the air separates to pass by a blunt body, such as the Vortex structure itself.

This also means that groups of Vortex units can be huddled closer together as the disruption of air movement in the wind stream is nowhere near as critical as it is when positioning standard, blade-driven wind turbines. This will also help ameliorate the inherent efficiencies in each unit as they can be grouped much closer together than their standard turbine counterparts and, therefore, potentially generate more power per square meter.

For years I have ranted about contemporary windmills and wind farms, because of their expense, maintenance costs, inefficiencies, noise, ecological damage to birds and other wildlife, and visual blight on the landscape.  In contrast, the vortex bladeless turbines are a vast improvement. 

What never ceases to amaze me, although I comment on it all the time, is the incredible inventiveness of people all over the world, in response to a needs-must requirement to protect ourselves and our planet from potential calamities such as manmade global warming and ‘peak oil’.  In fact, only a decade ago it was still fashionable to assume that the cost of crude oil would continue to rise remorselessly, ruining our economies in the process.  Today, thanks to technology, ever higher oil prices are only an OPEC pipedream. 

This item continues in the Subscribers’ Area.

The long-term positive macro story is still largely intact

● We met with a number of technocrats in place in key ministries who seem

well in command of their brief. We heard no complacency as yet on the need

for reforms.

● Quiet progress on longer-term structural reforms in some areas (National

Infra Fund, reducing Energy subsidies, direct transfer of subsidies).

● Significant progress on increasing coal production and dealing with

transport/environment clearance bottlenecks.

● Recognition that the MAT was an 'own goal' and committed to defusing the

problem.

● Feeling that corruption levels are diminishing and ease of doing business is

improving.

● Strong conviction that some big-ticket reforms will in fact occur, especially

GST, where we heard widespread agreement that if passed, this would have

significant positive impact.

● Near-term progress has been slower than expected

● Passing reform legislation through Parliament is proving an obstacle (the

opposition is focusing on polarizing issues like land reform, and retain control

of the Upper House)

● Lack of progress in addressing balance sheet problems for PSU banks and

corporates, limiting appetite for private investments

● General sense that onshore monetary conditions are tight and, in our view,

over-optimism about near term RBI easing

● Rural incomes/spending under stress due to weak commodity prices and

lower government spending, with no obvious near term relief

These and the other points mentioned sound reasonable to me.  India (weekly & daily) from the time Narendra Modi threw his hat into the electoral ring in September 2013, before peaking at 30000 in early March of this year.  I have maintained that it would experience a well deserved consolidation before eventually moving higher. 

This item continues in the Subscribers’ Area, where the list of bullet points is also posted..

It is possible that what is happening in China with respect to EVs and hybrid vehicles is a precursor of how America’s vehicle sales and distribution models will work. In response to air pollution and vehicle congestion in major cities, China has begun a strategic initiative to build EVs and is encouraging foreign manufacturers and their partners to join the effort. China expects as many as 40 new EV models go on sale in the country this year, triple the number of new EV models available two years ago. As described in an article in Business Week, Toyota Motors (TM-NYSE) will only market an EV in China as it is committed to hydrogen-powered vehicles as a better alternative to EVs elsewhere. In fact, its dedication to hydrogen-powered vehicles is why Toyota ended its all-electric Rav4 EV crossover partnership with Tesla Motors, Inc. (TSLA-Nasdaq).

China has new emission guidelines that call for a 28% improvement in average per vehicle fuel consumption by 2020, something that likely requires manufacturers to embrace plug-in EVs. Since China controls the permitting of new manufacturing facilities, automakers are almost forced to embrace EVs if they want to have plants capable of manufacturing new vehicles. According to an analyst with A.T. Kearney in Shanghai, China, all the new EV models coming to market may enable the industry to get 1-2 million EVs and other new Energy vehicles on the country’s roads by 2020. That achievement, however, will still fall well short of the government’s target of five million EVs being on the road.

While China may be the model, the technology still is short of delivering a reasonably-priced EV with a traveling range similar to that of an ICE vehicle, or roughly 200 miles on a single charge. There is also the issue with fast charging of EVs, as drivers will measure charging times against the length of time they must spend at the gas pump filling up their ICE vehicle. Environmental concerns are an important consideration for EVs, but they were largely bought by people more interested in impressing their neighbors with their statement about environmental concern than their economics. The fact these clean-fuel vehicles are now being traded in for conventionally-fueled vehicles at an accelerating rate suggests that economics are clearly trumping environmental considerations. Whether this is a good thing or not remains to be seen, but the fact it is happening tells us how powerful the pocketbook is for consumer purchasing decisions. It also tells us that auto manufacturers need to address the shortcomings of EVs and hybrids if they want them to become a competitive auto market segment. Then again, those manufacturers may just elect to let the draconian U.S. fuel-efficiency standards force consumers to buy these less desirable vehicles.

 

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber's Area.

As the world’s largest car market, China’s regulatory structure will make waves around the world. If China is insisting on electric vehicles in order to contain pollution then car manufacturers will have little choice but to build them. 

An additional thought with regard to range anxiety: A large number of people, at least in Southern California lease they vehicles. In order to get the best price for the vehicle at the end of the lease, mileage has to be kept low. This means that many people rent a car for long trips and use their own car for commuting. I wonder if it is conceivable that the same model will expand beyond SoCal with the advent of electric vehicles which may or may not have overcome their range issues within the next decade. 

We expect Brucejack to have sizeable production and free cash flow
Based on Pretium Resources' June 2014 feasibility study and starting from 2018, we believe the Brucejack deposit has the ability to produce average annual life-of-mine (LOM) gold production of 404.1koz at an all-in sustaining cost (AISC) of CAD 500/oz for 18 years, post an initial capital cost of CAD 811.9m.

We initiate with a BUY rating and a target price of CAD 10.88/share.
Our target price is based on a sum-of-the-parts valuation composed of the following: 1.0x NPV9% of our LOM assumptions for the Brucejack project, balance sheet items, the after-tax PV9% of general and administration and exploration costs, PV7% of the after-tax interest costs, financing assumptions and in-the-money (ITM) instruments.

A link to the full report is posted in the Subscriber;s Area.

The post credit crisis environment has been difficult for explorers as Energy prices surged, access to credit was restricted and gold prices fell from their 2011 peak. More recently the outlook has improved not least because Energy prices no longer represent so much of a headwind and gold prices have stabilised. The rationalisation that has purged the sector of wildcat investors has resulted in leaner, more disciplined and cheaper operations. This is reflected in the valuation of the Gold BUGS Index relative to the bullion price.