Showing posts with label natural gas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label natural gas. Show all posts

Sunday, July 27, 2025

Melt Up Not Convincing - Weekly Blog # 899

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Melt Up Not Convincing

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

 

 

Contrary Evidence Also Not Convincing

 

Low Transaction Volume, High Chatter

 

Short-Term Implications

 

  1. NASDAQ is breaking up. Up volume is leading, while more prices are down than up?
  2. Industrial commodity prices rose during the week, 115.8 vs 114.98 the prior week according to ECRI.
  3. AAII weekly bullish outlook is declining, 36.8%, 39.3%, and 41.4% over the last 3 weeks.
  4. WSJ weekly down prices seem strange. The worst was Natural Gas -12.71%, but the next worst was a -2.82% negative return. This suggests there were few negative prices. Natural Gas prices remained volatile, being up +7.57% the prior week.

 

Possible Longer-Term Implications

  1. Trump used construction costs for an already constructed Federal Reserve building to raise the costs of the new headquarters. Chairman Powell spotted it. Assume for the moment this was a honest mistake, it suggests that the President’s staff is lacking something. There have been similar mistakes, some of which were part of the reason the courts ruled against various executive orders.
  2. Charley Ellis’ column on David Swensen in the Financial Times listed some of the reasons for Yale’s outstanding long-term record. A long-term focus meant less liquidity was needed and analysis went beyond financial statements to management policies, and well-placed alumni which wasn’t mentioned. I tried to follow his approach.
  3. Most US Presidents have focused on managing the government and society as it was when they came into office. President Trump is the fourth president to make fundamental changes. (The others were Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, and FDR.) Along with the other activists Presidents, the current occupant of The White House wishes to proscribe new ways of thinking to change our behavior. This is what our founders feared, the tyranny of the majority over the minority. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights have built in checks and balances. Consequently, I believe we are going to see more court actions for the rest of this term.

 

Implications?

I believe it’s going to be increasingly difficult to develop a long-term investment policy as we go through a period of attempted structural change.

 

What do you think?

 

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: It May Be Early - Weekly Blog # 898

Mike Lipper's Blog: Misperceptions: Contrarian & Other Viewpoints: Majority vs Minority - Weekly Blog # 897

Mike Lipper's Blog: Expectations: 3rd 20%+ Gain - Stagflation - Weekly Blog # 896



 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Sunday, February 16, 2025

Recognizing Change as it Happens - Weekly Blog # 876

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Recognizing Change as it Happens

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

 

 

Perspective is Difficult to Read

When gazing out a window while traveling in a car or a plane the view constantly changes, while the view within the vehicle remains constant, similar to the internal changes we experience while investing. Many of us are aware of both the outer world and our own investment perspective, although we are often unaware of the changes in people next to us. Rarely do we focus on factors impacting our own thinking during our travels.

 

Now may be a good time to review what is happening to those close to us, and even more importantly to ourselves. The following list of items crossed my consciousness this week, causing me to consider changes to our investments. In no particular order:

 

  1. While I am aware of the US stock market trading volume growing, the rate of change between the 2 stock markets is telling. Over the last 12 months trading volume on the NYSE has grown +8.03%, while the NASDAQ has grown +57.39%. This indicates that there are two very separate markets. This was confirmed by Thompson Reuters’*, an old Canadian/British firm, through their actions this week. They moved their US listing to the “junior” exchange, which they identified as the home of technology companies.
  2. The AAII sample survey had only 28.4% of their participants being bullish for the next 6 months, while 47.3% were bearish.
  3. The Economic Cycle Research Institute (ECRI) industrial price index was up +6.44% over the past 12 months.
  4. The Chinese marriage rate has dropped -20.5%.
  5. JP Morgan Chase* announced layoffs for next year.
  6. International Mutual Funds were the best performing group this week for the first time in a long time, led by large-cap growth funds.
  7. The Financial Times is asking how big Walmart* can get.
  8.  Until we actually see the final legislation and/or a court ruling, one wonders how the US will be governed. The US executive branch of government is in the courts for changes they’d like to make, after legal challenges.

I wonder how much longer the four international political leaders (Putin, Xi, Trump, and Moodi) will remain in power.

(* Owned in client or personal accounts.)

 

We are at a period in history where multiple large changes are occurring somewhat simultaneously, with significant consequences for winners and losers. Time is a scarce resource and that creates a sense of urgency among the participants. The following events bear close scrutiny as the outcome will be consequential for all.

  • Change in US government – The power dynamic is being challenged in Washington DC and the courts, with a clear understanding that power could revert to the old order after the mid-term elections. So, Republicans recognize that change must be accomplished within the next two years. If the Republicans are successful, the country will likely see smaller government with some power ceded to the states. Smaller government should come with smaller costs, a plus for the national debt situation.
  • Global government dynamics – Many governments around the world are grappling with similar ideological dynamics as those seen in the USA and are nervous about what might come next. This was on full display at the Munich Security Conference this week. The potential for trade wars could intensify significantly.
  • Two wars have the potential to conclude this year, Gaza and Ukraine. Not all are likely to be happy with the outcome. Nor will there be unanimity among those shepherding the negotiation. Rebuilding will be costly in both locations, with no clear indication of who will pay and what deals will be struck to compensate those investing the money.
  • Significant technological changes are likely in the next few years, with AI, robotics, and automation at the center of these changes. There will likely be big losers and winners, where the first mover advantage could be quite significant.
  • An energy renaissance is likely, as the new technology driven future requires substantially more power than what it is replacing. The green revolution will not likely provide adequate solutions for the energy shortages. Natural gas and nuclear power seem to be the likeliest winners, as they provide the most consistent baseloads and the smallest CO2 emissions.    

Each of these bullet points has the potential to be disruptive. Having them all occur at roughly the same time will make for a challenging investment environment. While traders may be able to trade successfully, the odds favoring investing are declining for the next several years.

 

I would like to hear contrary views.

 

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: A Rush to the 1930s - Weekly Blog # 875

Mike Lipper's Blog: More Evidence of New Era - Weekly Blog # 874

Mike Lipper's Blog: Roundtable Discussion - Weekly Blog # 873



 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Sunday, November 17, 2024

Reading the Future from History - Weekly Blog # 863

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Reading the Future from History

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

 

 

History May Suggest:

  1. The American People Won the Election
  2. The Recession has started

 

The Declaration of Independence was signed on August 2nd, 1776, the US Constitution was passed in 1787, and the last state (Rhode Island) ratified it in 1790. Today, Rhode Island still remains the smallest state in the Union. Thus, since the beginning of our nation the rights of our smallest state have been critical to our progress. One of the many things making the US different than other republics is The Founding Fathers fear of the tyranny of the larger states on the smaller states. Consequently, our Electoral College favors state representation over population. In the 2024 election, even though President Trump polled more votes than Vice President Harris, the House is almost evenly split, but he won 36 states and lost only 14, mostly on the coasts or major rivers.

 

This split is one reason I suggested President Trump will likely have difficulty getting much legislation easily passed through both houses, where he only has a majority of about five votes. Of the 14 major issues, only two can be accomplished through just executive orders.

 

Actually, many if not most Americans are pleased with the results of the election. An incompetent government was dismissed before it became even more intrusive and has been replaced by a new administration with untried ideas. New legislation will be delayed by a disruptive Congress and a slow-walking Deep State. Many Americans would like it if the air conditioners in D.C. did not work, fulfilling Hamilton and Madison desire that government work be part-time.

 

Recession Coming?

As someone rowing in a boat with the wind picking up and clouds darkening, you become relatively certain it will soon rain. The question is, will you get to dry land before getting really wet?

 

Evidence of an economic storm on the horizon can be summed up as follows:

  1. Stock analysts have been instructed for generations that high quality bonds are more sensitive to economic changes than stocks, at least initially. Currently, yields have been going up (prices down). However, mid-quality bond prices have barely moved at all, something overseas fixed income investors are very sensitive to.
  2. Most US stock prices declined this week, with just 37.7% of the stocks on the NYSE rising and only 27.6% rising on the NASDAQ. NASDAQ stocks have performed better than those on the “Big Board” for some time and are cheaper on a market to book value basis. This suggests the NASDAQ investor is a more professional investor.
  3. The American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) weekly sample survey of investors indicates the bullish or bearishness sentiment of their investors for the next six months. In the last three weeks, the bullish reading has risen to 49.8% from 39.5%, while the bearish reading only went down to 28.3% from 30.9%. Market analysts believe the “public” is often wrong at turning points. With that in mind, it is interesting that the bulls gained 10.3% while the bears dropped only 2.2%.
  4. The weekend WSJ tracks some 72 prices of stock indices, commodities, ETFs, and currencies. This week only 12.5% were up, with Natural Gas up a leading 5.77%. The remaining gainers all rose by less than 2%. This likely indicates sophisticated investors are nervous about what lies ahead.

 

 

Thoughts?

 

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: Inflection Point: “Trump Trade” at Risk - Weekly Blog # 862

Mike Lipper's Blog: This Was the Week That Was, But Not What Was Expected - Weekly Blog # 861

Mike Lipper's Blog: Both Elections & Investments Seldom What They Seem - Weekly Blog # 860



 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Sunday, February 21, 2021

Debt, Inflation, and Markets - Weekly Blog # 669

 



Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings


Debt, Inflation, and Markets


Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018 –




I. The Changing Value and Price of Money

As is often the case, when we speak of purchasing a good or service, we mention its cost in our local currency. We don’t view the purchase in terms of unrelated transactions, like a vacation vs. a month’s rent. If we were more intellectually rigorous, we would calibrate the purchase in terms of inflation and currency exchange rates. For those whose wealth is totally used up by spending, this thinking is understandable. However, for those who have savings/investments, this singular way of thinking reduces future wealth and spending power.


With the above predicate, all savers/investors should focus on prices and inflation. An agreed price is the result of supply meeting demand and the costs incurred in the present or future. As in a gunfight, don’t show up with only a knife. For serious purchases, don’t bargain without insight into the history of prices. In the modern world, where services are the largest part of an economy, we have difficulty grasping the costs driving prices. For manufactured goods, the costs of raw materials and industrial goods play a dominate role, excluding the cost of labor. That is why I pay attention to the weekly reading of JOC-ECRI Industrial Price Index, which saw a price rise of +44.83% year over year. Part of the price explosion is due to capital expenditures not keeping up with demand. For example, Goldman Sachs is warning of a copper scarcity in the coming months, leading to the largest deficit in ten years. A somewhat similar situation is occurring in the oil patch.


In analyzing inflation, it is useful to recognize who benefits, who hedges and who loses. The pure benefactors of rising inflation are the relatively few that gain from rising prices, due to it being the sole input to their financial well-being. Most people have a mix of prices received and prices paid. Some are naturally balanced, while others hedge offsets. Non-savers/investors who consume all their income are clear losers, as the losses created by the declining value of a currency are the equivalent of a tax. 


The motivations of the Federal government are mixed. When governments pay off their debts with inflated dollars, they net the difference between the purchasing power of the dollar and its contractual payment value. In addition, personal income tax payments rise on the inflated income. (Since corporations pay taxes on their pretax income, which may be offset by inflated costs, their pain of inflation is less.) 


From a political vantage point, the financial problems of the non-saving poor are intensified. However, for some politicians this problem has a “silver” lining, it encourages the redistribution of wealth through the socialization of the concern. In a healthy economy, increases in productivity often create gains that offset the pain of inflation, but US redistribution also leads to increases in jobs overseas and makes international investing more attractive. (The difference between international and global investing is that international investing excludes the home country, which global does not.)


Most investors ignore declines in purchasing power due to currency depreciation or inflation, if they are small. Due to current conditions and global political leadership, it may be prudent to adjust investments.


II. Breaking the “Bubble” Ahead?

Since the beginning of recorded history we have dealt with seasonal cycles and those that last longer. Trading markets adjust due to the relative strength of buyers and sellers, thus markets have they own cycles. Economic and market cycles do not always coincide, and when they don’t coincide the amplitude of the cycles is more limited. As long-term investors, we therefore need to examine the probability of the next declining phase, both in terms of economic and market cycles. In analyzing cycles it is useful to look at elements the popular media and marketers can spout quickly. You should also look for structural changes that can cause the foundation of the cycle to weaken to a point where it collapses. What are the signs I see?    


Economic Structural Issues

Debt is a major accelerator of most economic collapses, distinct from those primarily caused by political, medical, or climate changes. Debt is already growing much faster than the economy, even before the full increase in debt at all levels of government globally is disclosed.  Normally, the banking system controls the policing of debt. However, significant debt is being extended by non-bank credit groups in many countries, including China and the US. The problem with debt is that it replaces equity for temporary uses and speculative purposes, solving short-term needs, but doing little to generate long-term investment. While China and some other countries are spending on infrastructure to produce longer-term economic gains, it is not happening in the US. While both the past and current administration have discussed infrastructure programs, the private sector has not indicated a willingness to provide substantial equity. We don’t seem willing to get little or no cash return for a number of years, before the supposed gusher of profits arrive.


The steepening of the yield curve may be capturing this reluctance. There is great competition to supply short-term funds for margin debt and short-sales by brokerage firms and banks. Bank money market account interest rates dropped below 10 basis points this week, indicating banks have no need to attract new deposits to make additional loans, driving the front end of the yield curve even lower. On the other hand, interest rates at the long end of the curve are now higher than they were last year. One should remember that the published yield curve is for US Treasury paper and long rates for perceived lesser credit should be higher. This drives up the costs of long-term equity dollars, making them scarcer.


This week’s weather in Texas and the Midwest shows the need for much more capital spending on local infrastructure and power generation. The purported growth of electric vehicles will also shift energy needs from oil to natural gas, which should economically be distributed through pipelines, contrary to the present government’s wishes. The combination of new regulation and higher taxes means that many energy facilities will be taken off-line. Fitch believes the removal of these units for economic production will reduce the earnings of the energy companies, which in turn will lead to lower credit ratings that drive up their capital costs. Beyond the energy sector, the expected jump in taxes and regulation will reduce the ability of industry and individuals to generate capital for spending and investment.


Stock Market Structural Changes

Most of the time money follows performance. In the week ended Thursday, an index of the large S&P 500 index funds gained +4.47%. Five other equity fund indices were up at least twice as much:

  Lipper Small Cap Value           +13.13%

  Lipper Pacific Ex Japan          +13.10%

  Lipper Global Natural Resources  +11.66%

  Lipper Science & Tech            +11.48%

  Lipper Financial Services        +10.05%


There is no common denominator in the five leading groups, except they are not primarily large companies and the leading tech companies have less influence of in the portfolios of the largest funds.


The cash positions of many of the leading institutional investors are near a historic lows and the new speculators are heavy users of margin. The American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) weekly sample survey of bearish sentiment for the next six months has dropped 10.2% (25.4% vs 35.6%) in the last three weeks, with an almost concomitant rise in bullish sentiment (47.1% vs 37.4%). Professional market analysts view these as contrarian indicators and the combination of the three sentiment indicators could be significant.


Investment Conclusion

Rising stock markets have a habit of lasting longer than when structural problems are present, staying “bullish” until something changes mass opinion. I would use this enthusiasm to raise this year’s cash needs. I expect within two years we will have an opportunity to buy valuable investments with more knowledge and at better prices.

   

Important Note: 

I always want to hear from our subscribers, but I particularly appreciate hearing from subscribers that can correct or disagree with what I have written. That is how I learn to do a better job. In response to last week’s blog, a long-time subscriber and investment professional with non-Us experience, correctly noted that the Declaration of War between Germany and the US was declared by Germany a few days after the December 7th attack on Pearl Harbor. It was followed  by the US declaring war on Germany in a reciprocal move. This re-enforces my view that the main impact of an action is often the reactions of others to the event. In this case, if the move by the Germans was to support Japan, it had a different impact on both, as well as the US. In terms of Germany and the US, it led to a two-front war waged by the US, with the political decision to primarily focus on the European War. This in turn gave more force to the industrial mobilization of the US, which probably shortened the overall war effort,  leading to the surrender of both Japan and Germany. One should think through the reactions of others to the moves you make.




Question of the Week: What is the worst for which you are prepared? 




Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2021/02/mike-lippers-monday-morning-musings.html


https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2021/02/adjust-investment-tools-for-next-phase.html


https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-gamestop-missing-event-weekly-blog.html




Did someone forward you this blog? 

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com


Copyright © 2008 - 2020


A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved.


Contact author for limited redistribution permission.


Sunday, October 18, 2020

Momentum is Slowing under Too Many Cross-Trends - Weekly Blog # 651

 



Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings


Momentum is Slowing under Too Many Cross-Trends


Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018 –




The human mind prefers simple actions leading to success in order to address present issues. As a professional investor with fiduciary responsibilities, that is what I want. However, the discipline of preparing a weekly blog does not often lead to straight-forward conclusions. This is such a week and the best I can do is to briefly outline the various cross-trends that I perceived. I ask subscribers to select the options that direct them to an investment conclusion, which hopefully they’ll share.


The following is a list of the trends in no order:

  1. Seeing signs of smart professional bottom fishing buyers in Energy, particularly natural gas related and an array of financial services-banks, funds, brokers, and service providers.
  2. A minority of professionals appear to be bullish and a sizable minority of the public are bearish. The rest are confused and waiting for direction, with more than normal cash reserves.
  3. Myopically cheap securities can be value traps due to outmoded statistical measures and/or inappropriate timing.
  4. Alibaba, Ant Group, and Tencent’s securities are being found in  institutional portfolios. These groups are becoming more global rather than focusing on Chinese holdings. (Almost all companies are influenced by trends beyond their headquarters’ locations, some more than others.)
  5. In the weekend WSJ, only 42% of price aggregations rose this week.
  6. “More than 40% of total US equity trading volume now takes place outside of public stock exchanges”, according to the Chicago Board Options Exchange.
  7. The NASDAQ Composite gained +0.79% and the NYSE Composite declined -0.63% this week. As there is less passive trading in the NASDAQ relative to the NYSE, I believe it is a better indicator of professional investors thinking.
  8. The JOC-ECRI Industrial Price Index is up +6.69% from a year ago, signaling inflation.
  9. For the week, the average Large-Cap Growth Equity Fund was up +1.81%, S&P 500 index funds were up +1.07% and Value funds were down -0.29%. Not the expected change in momentum pundits were expecting.
  10. According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, most stimulus payments were saved or applied to reducing debt. Hedge fund performance fees do not protect investors from paying for poor performance.
  11. PwC’s view of the World in 2050 is based on the following points: 
    • World GDP will double by 2037 and almost triple by 2050.
    • China is already the largest based on currency purchasing power(CPP) on market exchange rates (MER) and will be number 1 in 2028. 
    • India will be the 2nd largest in 2050 (CPP) and 3rd in (MER).
    • Mexico and Indonesia will replace the UK and France by 2030.
    • Nigeria and Vietnam will be the fastest growing by 2050.
    • There will be a significant gap between the top three: China, India, and the US vs the rest.
    • The US will remain the wealthiest.


Working Conclusion:

Some of these observations may prove to be useful to long-term investors, but probably not all. The timing of their value is also uncertain. I therefore suggest you have a global orientation with a reasonable amount of liquidity (cash or highly liquid stocks). Any high-quality fixed income holdings beyond a 2-year maturity could be a burden. The appropriate investment objective is to first avoid losing purchasing power, with an additional reserve for being wrong. The second objective is to build capital opportunities in a number of places and different vehicles when possible.


Questions for the week:

  1. What do you think of the list?
  2. Will anything mentioned cause you to make any changes?
  3. What are the other trends we should be tracking?




Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2020/10/mike-lippers-monday-morning-musings-are.html


https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2020/10/what-is-nasdaq-saying-to-whom-weekly.html


https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2020/09/there-is-incredible-shortage-weekly.html




Did someone forward you this blog? 

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com


Copyright © 2008 - 2020


A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.


Sunday, May 20, 2012

1776 Can Make Us Independent Again


Historical Introduction


Most Americans believe the single most significant act of 1776 was the signing of the Declaration of Independence. I suggest that when facing today’s economic problems we consider a still more important event that occurred  in 1776, the publication of Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations.  (Not to be confused with the very insightful contemporary author and television personality who uses Adam Smith as a pseudonym.)


The two events are very much related. Our Declaration of Independence was driven by the colonists’ abhorrence to the Navigation Acts and other laws of Great Britain that raised the costs of imports into America and restricted the transportation of our exports. Remember the famous Boston Tea Party was caused by the tax on imported tea.


These laws were an outgrowth of the mercantilist philosophy of European governments to promote their own exports and restrict imports into their lands. This governing philosophy reigned between about 1500 and 1800, and was based on the need to get trading partners to ship gold to those countries where they had an unfavorable balance of trade. The importance of gold was not primarily economic, but rather to pay for their constant wars. In the minds of the European leaders, particularly the British and French, this was a matter of survival.


What Adam Smith advocated was that nations should specialize in their production of items to be exported and import those items where they did not have a cost advantage. Over the succeeding generations his ideas were finally accepted.


Today and for some time American Presidents have announced policies that would make the US independent of foreign oil. In response to questions and comments from a number of regular blog readers, I will attempt, in a small way, to play an Adam Smith role.


My biases


I have never seen a totally unbiased report. Most of the authors are not fully conscious of their own biases, particularly those that were inculcated into them at their universities. As we are all captives of our experience, biases cannot be completely avoided. The best we should do is to identify either the biases or the sources of our biases. Mine starts with a college course in Middle-Eastern history, geology and geo-politics. I learned that in Saudi Arabia, the direct lifting cost of a barrel of oil was approximately four dollars and did not change much over the years. From time to time I have invested directly into domestic gas producers to make money or energy-focused mutual funds as an inflation defensive move. When I was lucky enough to become a trustee of Caltech I was exposed to numerous professors who were focusing advanced scientific approaches to find energy and use it more efficiently. These inputs allow me to think about a problem from different viewpoints, and therefore biases. 


Parsing the search for energy solutions


The three main fuel sources of energy are oil, gas, and coal. (For the purposes of this search I am ignoring nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal with the belief they will play an expanding role, but won’t provide sufficient power in the short to intermediate future.) I believe that each of the age-old big three should be addressed individually.


Oil


This is where I put my hat on as a modern Adam Smith. The popular view of Americans from the White House to Main Street is that it is dangerous for us to rely on the importation of oil from those nations that  “don’t like us.”  The fear is that in time of military conflict those that supply us with oil will cut off flow, or at least hold it up for ransom. There are many counter arguments to this fear. First, our military has developed lots of means to defeat an enemy without the need for the quantities of petroleum products required in World War II and subsequent engagements. Second, we have built a strategic oil reserve which is intended for military emergencies. (Not to be used as a politically-inspired price mechanism.) Third, if needed, government agencies believe that there is more oil underlying US government-owned land than has been discovered in the rest of the world.


There is another set of economic arguments which update Smith, the canny Scotsman. If oil is a scarce resource and cannot be easily replaced, we should deplete other countries’ reserves and political power by buying all that they will sell to us. Further, a rise in the international price of oil, while somewhat painful to the US in the short-term, dramatically changes our competitive position in the world. The US is less dependent on foreign oil than Western Europe, Japan and China. If petroleum manufacturing costs for the rest of the globe goes up and we have competitive products at a lower price, the US share of market will go up which can aid our job growth. Based on what we have already seen, the threat of higher priced oil will trigger greater conservation efforts and the development of more efficient uses of energy.


Gas


There are reasons to believe that the US and certainly Canada can be net exporters of natural gas. Other countries are also developing their gas properties. From a strategic viewpoint, I might be reluctant to become too reliant on imported gas except from Canada. Over time I would expect the bulk of our heating requirements will be filled by natural gas. We are likely to see both the military and large trucking fleets switching to hybrid or fully dependent upon “nat. gas.” The environmentalists will need to prove that fracking is dangerous to the neighborhoods of gas extraction and then our technologists will probably find solutions.


Coal


Some politicians have proclaimed that there is no such thing as clean coal. Considering the US has a reported 250 year supply of coal, I hope they are wrong.


If the price of energy goes up, I believe that there will be enough room in the final price of coal for both steel-making and heating to cover the costs of technological fixes that are underway.


Conclusions


Just as 1776 brought forth thoughts and actions that changed the world, I think we are at the point of achieving meaningful economic energy independence in the near-term future as we modernize our thinking.


As is my wont turning to investments, I would suggest investments in stocks of companies that are devoting some of their efforts to new ways to make our search and use of energy more efficient. These areas could be mining and extracting efforts, transportation efficiencies, and battery producers among many other beneficiaries of the application of new and improved technologies. These could include some, but not all, of the major oil, gas and coal companies.


Are you ready to be independent in the new world?  Let me know.
____________________________________________________
Did you miss Mike Lipper’s blog last week?  Click here to read.


I invite you to be part of this Blog community by commenting on my Blog posts or by adding your perspective to the topic. All comments or inquiries will be handled confidentially.

Please address your comments to: Email Mike Lipper's Blog.

To subscribe to this Blog, or to refer a colleague or family member, use the email box or RSS feed sign-up on the left side of MikeLipper'sBlog.Blogspot.com

Sunday, April 8, 2012

Exploring for $1/Gallon Gasoline

This is the season that the great religions of the world celebrate the past and look forward to a rewarding future. Analysts should also study the past and look to the future by thinking the “unthinkable thoughts.” Today’s blog seeks to do exactly that. I am exploring the possibility of $1 per gallon gasoline. Like most prospectors and researchers, our work is a series of explorations, not of successful predictions. Whether we will ever see $1 gas is dependent on many of the variables to be discussed. As with successful prognosticators to the public, I should not predict both a direction and timing; but I suggest that if you choose to save these thoughts, it should be for your children or probably your grandchildren.

An incomplete list of the variables:

Taxes

No government that I am aware of will let a major stream of energy move from its source to its consumption without layering on taxes. (The main differences between our close to $4 price and Europe’s about $9 price for the same amount of auto fuel are the taxes imposed. There are some governments that subsidize the retail price, but find other ways to collect tax revenues.) Thus, the final price that we pay is dependent on tax distribution policies of host countries.

Technology

Due to my biases as a US Marine Corps communication officer, a securities analyst of tech companies, and most of all as a trustee in close contact with Caltech, I admit to being in awe of technology. Fundamentally, most forms of physical energy are found in nature and converted to power through various mechanical steps. Just as wars have spurred on the development of much of what is considered to be modern medicine and organizational management practices, I suspect that our exploration of space will lead to material changes in finding sources of energy, the extraction of energy as well as the processing, distribution and safe use of energy. Already, major oil deposits have been found through the use of manned and unmanned satellites. In order to accomplish our mission of exploring the planets, various remote techniques have been developed that deal with dangerous gasses and techniques for probing and “mining” from land surfaces. Some of the technological developments from space such as efficient payload management and global positioning systems (GPS) found use here on earth.

Technology is at work uncovering more efficient and safer ways of developing our natural resources; bringing into economic production energy sources that today look to be too expensive and too dangerous. Clearly we will utilize more fuel efficient vehicles on land, sea, and air in the future. Homes, offices, and manufacturing/processing plants will manage their usage of energy better. There are many other ways in which technology will both help give us more bang for our energy buck, and will also make us even more dependent on the increasingly efficient use of energy. Thus technology will affect both sides of the supply/demand equation.

Oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear

Ever since I first started looking at the economics and politics of energy in the 1950s, I have heard about reaching “peak oil production,” as we are not finding oil as fast as we are using it. I recall that some believed that we would have found all the oil the Earth had to give us by the 1960s. In each decade since, the peaking date has been reestablished, and in each decade more “juice” has been found. For both commercial and regulatory reasons, the size of these discoveries has been downplayed. Further, I suspect secondary drilling through the use of advanced technology will be more productive than is currently believed. In this season of heightened religious belief, I believe that there is more productive oil out there than most others believe, and a good bit of it in or near the US.

Natural gas was a waste product in the days of early oil production; it was just burned away at the wellhead. Through the use of technology and higher prices for oil, the governments and the people of the world have begun to appreciate the economic advantages of natural gas. We are addressing the concerns about fracking in terms of environmental dangers. Actually, at the moment we have too much natural gas, and this week we hit the lowest recorded price for this commodity in ten years. To me, it is only a matter of time and some technology until we have a significant expansion in the use of “NG” (No longer standing for Not Good, but for Natural Gas.) Thus, I see that the available supply of energy will rise and at some point impact the price of oil.

Coal

We are all aware of how dirty coal is. We are conscious of the dangers of manned mining and the effects of coal burning on our once pristine environment. Because of these issues and to some extent unwise government regulation, coal in all its forms has lost share of market. However, as a firm believer both in technology and the eventual power of economics, I do not think we have experienced the last of the beneficial use of coal on a global basis. In South Africa, I have seen the conversion of coal to oil to meet a politically-driven need, which demonstrates the creativity of some of the coal business leaders.

Nuclear

If you don’t want coal burning in your backyard do you want to have an atomic reactor quietly producing energy? The tragedies both in Japan and Russia were caused by faulty locations and poorly constructed facilities. Little publicity is seen on the safe use of atomic power in Europe, US, and elsewhere. After a period of twenty years, the US government has authorized the first new non-military use of a reactor. (The US Navy and others have been successful users of atomic power for a couple of generations.) Will procedures be developed to reduce the odds of fatal accidents? Yes.

Thus, I believe that with technology’s help, we have sufficient potential supply of energy.

The demand side

The Saudi Arabian government and others are vitally aware that the price of energy is, in the end, driven by demand. One of the best ways to measure the level of economic development in a country is to track its use of energy. (Some of the political leaders in China are more sensitive to the level of electricity use than they are to the softer calculation of GDP.) While the price for oil will have an impact as to the costs of a society to produce a particular standard of living, Saudi Arabia’s fear is that too high a price will drive substitution efforts even faster. On a long-term basis they should be worried. (As mentioned above, there are energy alternatives and technology is making them safer and cheaper.)

Habit changes

Slowly we are becoming more efficient consumers of energy. However, this is being offset by our growing demand to use more energy by our various appliances, including computer and entertainment devices. Some governments recognize that gradualism won’t work to bring energy demand into better balance. As an Easterner I hate to admit it, but the government of California has a useful idea. A recent Wall Street Journal article, entitled “California Declares War on Suburbia” suggests that a more efficient use of resources would be to gently move people into the cities, which is what is happening in China. Not only could this improve our use of energy, but could significantly improve the overall level of education and safety available within the cities. If it were to happen, then the number of energy consuming cars is likely to drop.

Two other considerations

Our current world is, as always, a balance of power. The current fulcrum of power is in the amount of energy that is produced both for internal and external use. If we had a world with a more balanced use of energy, various forces would likely cause changes of political leadership, and perhaps even the composition and identity of various countries. Many political leaders are not blind to these possibilities.

The second consideration is the monetary value of energy. At the wholesale level, energy today (particularly oil) is priced in dollars. This is a historic accident of past wars, economic development and relative stability of the value of the US dollar. At the moment, I believe the US society is committed to inflation, therefore at some point the rest of the world will wish to price things in dual, if not multiple currencies to protect from politically-inspired deficit spending by the US government. Thus, perhaps I should amend my search for $1/gallon gasoline to a level commensurate with about a $1700 per ounce price of gold.

Investment afterthoughts

Consider the following on how to put these thoughts into practice:

  1. You should not bet that the price of oil will always be a good inflation protection.

  2. Inflation is a product of global excessive spending relative to saving, and is likely to continue

  3. View some of the large international oil companies as akin to investment banks. If they choose investment wisely within their circle of competence, they can have good results. (Interestingly, both international oil stocks and those of investment banks are low price/earnings ratio groups. The difference is that the oil companies have higher dividends and yields.)

  4. Find technology producers that have a pattern of producing labor and energy saving devices, particularly those that can be applied to finding, extracting, transporting, processing, and using energy.

  5. Watch for useful lessons from space activities in terms of uses of energy on earth.

  6. Bet on increased urbanization, some of which will be cajoled by the government, which will lead to better primary and secondary education and safer streets.

  7. While $1/ gallon gasoline is not an “odds on favorite,” it could happen and that may not be a good thing

Does any of this make sense to either discuss with your children/grandchildren or to pass it on to them at some future point?


Did you miss Mike Lipper’s Blog last week? Click here to read.

I invite you to be part of this Blog community by commenting on my Blog posts or by adding your perspective to the topic. All comments or inquiries will be handled confidentially.

Please address your comments to: Email Mike Lipper's Blog.

To subscribe to this Blog, or to refer a colleague or family member, use the email box or RSS feed sign-up on the left side of MikeLipper'sBlog.Blogspot.com