New Drilling Method Opens Vast Oil Fields in US

Might need to delay ‘peak oil’ a bit.

More interesting, I’d estimate it would take about a 5 million barrel a day ‘shift’ in net demand to dislodge the Saudis as swing producer, as they can only cut production by less than that much to sustain price should that happen.

In other words, a combination of increased non opec supply and reduced world demand of 5 million bpd would force a cut in production of that much for the Saudis to be able to continue to set price, from their current production level of about 8.5 million bpd.

And along with these ‘new drilling methods’ Iraq is looking to add over 5 million bpd in capacity over the next several years.

The question is what will happen with demand, and looks to me the US and Europe are starting to go the other way and reduce gasoline demand via conservation (higher mpg’s in vehicles) and shifting to alternative fuels, directly and indirectly.

So what’s the Saudi’s best move here?
Keep prices high a long as possible and get all the wealth they can before prices collapse?
Or cut price in an attempt to discourage the forces at work that are threatening their pricing power?

New Drilling Method Opens Vast Oil Fields in US

February 9 (AP) — A new drilling technique is opening up vast fields of previously out-of-reach oil in the western United States, helping reverse a two-decade decline in domestic production of crude.

Companies are investing billions of dollars to get at oil deposits scattered across North Dakota, Colorado, Texas and California. By 2015, oil executives and analysts say, the new fields could yield as much as 2 million barrels of oil a day—more than the entire Gulf of Mexico produces now.

This new drilling is expected to raise U.S. production by at least 20 percent over the next five years. And within 10 years, it could help reduce oil imports by more than half, advancing a goal that has long eluded policymakers.

“That’s a significant contribution to energy security,” says Ed Morse, head of commodities research at Credit Suisse .

Oil engineers are applying what critics say is an environmentally questionable method developed in recent years to tap natural gas trapped in underground shale. They drill down and horizontally into the rock, then pump water, sand and chemicals into the hole to crack the shale and allow gas to flow up.

Because oil molecules are sticky and larger than gas molecules, engineers thought the process wouldn’t work to squeeze oil out fast enough to make it economical. But drillers learned how to increase the number of cracks in the rock and use different chemicals to free up oil at low cost.

“We’ve completely transformed the natural gas industry, and I wouldn’t be surprised if we transform the oil business in the next few years too,” says Aubrey McClendon, chief executive of Chesapeake Energy, which is using the technique.

Petroleum engineers first used the method in 2007 to unlock oil from a 25,000-square-mile formation under North Dakota and Montana known as the Bakken. Production there rose 50 percent in just the past year, to 458,000 barrels a day, according to Bentek Energy, an energy analysis firm.

Refining Concerns Overshadow Higher Shell Profit

It’s an agonizingly slow process, but it is starting to feel like the world is turning away from crude oil consumption.

The Saudis are the swing producer, and can set price at any level they wish.
But if they set the price ‘too high’ over time demand shifts away from them due to both conservation and substitution.
(And if they set the price too low, consumption rises to eventually use up their excess capacity.)

It’s feeling to me like they have the price high enough to both cool consumption through both conservation and substitution, as evidenced by the demand for refined products discussed below and charts I’ve posted previously.

And slowly but surely the price of crude- as well as the unattractiveness of being dependent on it and the negative connotations of burning fossil fuels in general- is driving the investment and technology for both better fuel economy and a long term switch to electric power for transportation, as well as for a shift away from fossil fuels in general.

In theory a monopolist like the Saudis might respond by dropping the price to a level that discourages/crushes the investments associated with the switch out of crude- maybe $40 per barrel. But there’s no sign of that yet, and they may not want to dip into their cash reserves to the extent needed to support a move like that.

Nor, alternatively, with what’s going on in the region, might they believe then can afford politically to apply that much austerity to their population.

Also, this is all fundamentally $US friendly, and works to offset the negative impact on the dollar from higher crude prices per se.

Refining Concerns Overshadow Higher Shell Profit

By Sarah Young

February 3 (Bloomberg) — Shell disappointed investors on Thursday with below-forecast fourth-quarter profit, with concerns over its refining business overshadowing a sharp rise driven by higher oil prices.

The results followed strong earnings from Chevron and Exxon Mobil, although BP, struggling to put the Gulf of Mexico oil spill behind it, fared less well.

Shell shares fell 3 percent, with analysts saying they had expected more and expressing concern over continued weakness in the Anglo-Dutch oil major’s refining business, with oil product sales rising just 5 percent year-on-year.

“Our earnings were impacted by weak refining margins, pressure on certain regional natural gas prices, and volatility in downstream marketing margins as a result of rising oil prices,” Shell said.

Arbuthnot analyst Dougie Youngson said margins would be under increased pressure if oil prices remained at around $100 a barrel for long.

Benchmark U.S. crude prices averaged about $85 per barrel in the fourth quarter, up from $76 in the fourth quarter of 2009, but have since risen to above the $100 mark.

“The global market continues to see weak demand and pricing for oil products,” Youngson said in a note.

Shell said that despite a year-on-year improvement its refining results were lower compared with the third quarter because of “increased downtime at major refining facilities.”

Shell’s earnings on a current cost of supplies (CCS) basis, jumped to $5.7 billion from $1.2 billion a year ago when it suffered heavy refining losses. But Jos Versteeg, an analyst at Theodoor Glissen, said this was still less than anticipated.
Excluding non-operating and one-off items the fourth quarter result was $4.1 billion, short of a forecast for $4.85 billion, according to a Reuters poll.

Analysts welcomed Shell’s announcement of a $0.42 dividend for the quarter and the fact it expected to maintain that level for the first quarter of 2011.

Shell’s planned capital investment of $25-$27 billion for 2011 was also well received, with Sanford Bernstein’s Oswald Clint saying capex appeared under control.

However, Arbuthnot’s Youngson said he was concerned about Shell’s focus on gas, given continued price weakness and oversupply forecasts.

State of the Union

Some of the risks listed at year end seem to be coming on line, including slower growth out of China, euro austerity keeping a lid on demand in the euro zone, and US fiscal balance too tight for anything more than very modest top line growth, given current credit conditions and the negative income effects of near 0 interest rate policy and QE.

With crude oil continuing to soften, and Brent looking to close the gap with WTI by falling more than WTI, the dollar continues to gain fundamental support as it becomes ‘harder to get’ overseas.

And falling gold and silver prices, along with most other commodities, are showing a world that is sensitive to those indicators that QE2 doesn’t look to have been at all inflationary, leaving many people with positions they otherwise would not have taken (long gold, silver, commodity currencies, and other implied ‘short dollar’ positions).

The risk here is that the dollar gets very strong, and commodities very weak, which can lead to a US equity correction as well as a strong bond rally, all contributing to a deflationary malaise, as the theme remains:

Because we believe we can be the next Greece, we continue to work to turn ourselves into the next Japan

Which includes a misguided national effort to export our way to prosperity, which is likely to be featured by the President tonight.

Enter the Dragon- first published March 29, 2005

March 2005 Article:

Kudlow’s Guest Commentary:


Enter the Dragon – New Dynamics in the Oil Market

By Tom Nugent and Warren Mosler

Traditionally, the hedgers and speculators have ruled the commodity
markets. But now a new behemoth has stepped in- the institutional ‘long
only,’ ‘real money,’ fund manager, who has incorporated indirect ownership
of raw commodities as an ‘asset class.’ Yes, there are very large commercial
hedgers, and there are very large hedge funds who are speculators, but this
new entrant with $ trillions of assets under management is changing the
landscape.

In a recent Dow Jones Newswires article by Spencer Jakab, entitled
“US Pension Funds Dip Toe into Commodities, Roil Waters” the author
presents his research into the prospective impact of direct investor
involvement in commodities:

“…the advent of new funds that have allowed pension trustees to buy
a basket of commodities without dabbling in futures themselves, has
unleashed a torrent of money — an estimated $50 billion of flows into
indextracking funds in the last two years alone, with estimates of
another $50 billion on the way in 2005.”

What makes these funds qualitatively different is that they buy and,
for all practical purposes, never sell. In fact, most of them continue to net
buy an asset class as a percent of their total assets, which means as their
financial assets grow over time they buy and hold more and more
commodities. And this is exactly what the crude oil markets are telling us.
Even as inventories continue to grow well beyond commercial demand, the
price continues to rise, as pension funds continue to buy and hoard
inventory. And, if allowed to continue, this building inventory will grow
indefinitely and NEVER be used! Yes, price is still a matter of ‘supply and
demand,’ but in this case the demand is to hoard- continuously buy and
store, and NEVER sell.

At the macro level, our own pension funds are buying crude oil to put
away forever, by bidding up the price and depriving us FOREVER from using
the crude oil they purchase. This is truly a bizarre set of circumstances
at the macro level, while it makes perfect sense at the micro level. It is a
classic and colossal case of failure of institutional structure to serve a viable
public purpose.


To make matters worse, this monster has staggering geopolitical
consequences that are currently being played out. Hopefully essays on this
developing story will trigger more of the same that will enlighten our
leadership to these new forces in motion. But be prepared for things to get
much worse before they get better.

*Thomas E. Nugent is executive vice president and chief investment officer of
PlanMember Advisors, Inc. and chief investment officer for Victoria Capital
Management, Inc.

*Warren Mosler is a principal of Valance Co. and associate fellow at the Cambridge
Centre for Economic and Public Policy in the United Kingdom.

Pre Christmas update

The good news is the US budget deficit still looks to be plenty large to support modest top line growth.

And as the deficit continuously adds to incomes and savings, the financial burdens ratios continue to fall, and the stage is set for a ‘borrow to spend’, ‘get a job buy a car’, ‘it’s cheaper to own than to rent’ good old fashioned credit expansion.

But most all of that good news may already be discounted by the higher term structure of interest rates and the latest stock market rally.

And there are troubling near term and medium term risks out there that don’t seem at all priced in.

The rise in crude prices is particularly troubling.

Net demand isn’t up, and Saudi production remains relatively low.

So the Saudis are supporting higher prices for another reason. Maybe it’s the wiki leaks, or maybe they just had a bad night in London.

No way to tell, but they are hiking prices, and there’s no way to tell when they will stop.

Crude prices are already up enough to be a substantial tax on US consumers that has probably more than offset whatever aggregate demand might have been added by the latest tax package.

Might explain the weaker than expected holiday retail sales?

Congress will soon have a deficit terrorist majority, with many pledged to a balanced budget amendment.

And the world seems to be leaning towards fiscal tightening pretty much everywhere.

The unemployment benefits program has been extended but benefits still expire after 99 weeks, and less in many states.

Net state spending continues to decline as state and local govs continue to reduce their deficits and capital expenditures.

Catchup in the funding of unfunded pension liabilities will continue to be a drag on demand.

A federal pay freeze has been proposed.

The Fed’s 0 rate policy and qe continue to reduce net interest income earned by the economy.

Bank regulators continue to impose policies that work against small bank lending.

Seems some income has likely been accelerated into this quarter from next year over prior concerns of taxes rising, distorting q4 earnings to the upside and maybe lowering q1 earnings a bit?

Euro zone muddles through with very weak domestic demand, and curves perhaps flattening as markets start to believe the ECB will fund it all indefinitely?

China slows as a result of fighting inflation?

Same with Brazil?

Maybe India as well?

Commodity price slump with demand flattening?

Fed low forever?

Stocks in a long term trading range like Japan?

US term structure of interest rates gradually flattens to Japan like levels?

Relatively weak demand gradually brings on alternatives to over priced crude?

Merry Christmas!!!

Australia

I don’t follow it at all closely but in general they have been following a policy of budget surpluses and relying on increasing levels of private sector debt to sustain aggregate demand.

That’s not sustainable, even for China’s coal mine, and especially with China showing signs of slowing down.

Retailers cry poor as sales drop sharply during Christmas period

By Nick Gardner and Brittany Stack

December 19 — MAJOR store bosses claim Australia is experiencing a retail recession, with the quietest and slowest Christmas shopping period in 20 years.

Rising utility bills, mortgage rates and rents have decimated families’ disposable incomes, forcing many retailers to start Boxing Day sales one month in advance in a bid to entice shoppers, reported The Daily Telegraph.

Harvey Norman boss Gerry Harvey said there would be “blood on the streets” in the retail sector because business is so bad, the worst since the recession of the early 1990s.

“It’s a crisis, the worst in 20 years,” he said.

“There is a recession in retail right now. Boxing Day sales have had to come early because retailers need to sell something to pay their staff.”

The news comes as the Government announced an inquiry into the future of the retail sector to examine issues of competition, and the $1000 GST and duty-free threshold on overseas shopping.

Australian retailers and shopping centre owners have formed an alliance to try to persuade the government to abolish the $1000 GST-free threshold. They plan to spend millions on an advertising campaign to try to have imported goods subject to tax and import duty. Mr Harvey is not alone in his bleak outlook.

David Jones and Myer are offering discounts of up to 40 per cent across all departments in their Sydney stores, saying it was the toughest environment for years.

“Retail is challenging right now and to drive people into stores we are offering significant discounting,” Myer spokesman Mitch Catlin said.

“Every retailer is doing it. It is the best final week I can remember for consumers going into Christmas.”

David Jones described its sales as “patchy”.

Retailers traditionally make up to a third of their annual profits in December, but sales are down across the board as stores battle plummeting sales, shrinking profit margins and increased competition from overseas websites.

Russell Zimmerman, executive director of the Australian Retailers’ Association, said he’d never seen tougher conditions in 30 years.

“We’ve had 43 per cent of our retailers reporting sales figures for the period from December 5 to 11 at below last year’s levels. To have so many suffering falling sales is terrible.”

He said consumers have been affected not only by rate rises and higher utility bills but also spooked by events overseas. “They’re seeing economies such as Greece and Ireland in crisis and they’re getting worried,” Mr Zimmerman said.

He predicted retail sales of $39.9 billion, a 3.5 per cent rise on last year or about half the usual increase. He said this may force retailers to cut staff hours or cut back on casual workers. “We’re hoping for a good last week into Christmas,” he said.

Fiscal Package

Yes, at the better end of expectations, but still a small net tax increase as of year end. No actual relief for anyone.

And that’s best case. They haven’t actually passed it yet.

Austerity still going strong in the euro zone and the UK.

And China still working on slowing things down to fight inflation.

Oil prices are up which will slow things down some but not generate enough inflation for the Fed to care.

So doesn’t look like anything out there to move the needle on growth or inflation enough to get the Fed to hike any time soon.


Karim writes:

Definitely at the better end of expectations, for both the tax cuts and the unemployment benefits…

(CNN) — President Barack Obama presented congressional Democratic leaders Monday with a proposed deal with Republicans that would extend Bush-era tax cuts for two years and unemployment benefits for 13 months while also setting the estate tax at 35% for two years on inheritances worth more than $5 million, a senior Democratic source told CNN.

The deal also includes a temporary 2% reduction in the payroll tax to replace Obama’s “making work pay” tax credit from the 2009 economic stimulus package for lower-income Americans, the senior Democratic source said.

As currently crafted, the deal would prohibit amendments by either party, according to the source, who spoke on condition of not being identified by name.

China, Russia quit dollar for transactions

Doesn’t matter, though most everyone thinks it does.

What matter is what currency a nation saves in, not the numeraire for transactions.

So good this happened, so everyone can get past it and stop worrying about it.

China, Russia quit dollar

By Su Qiang and Li Xiaokun

November 24 (China Daily) — St. Petersburg, Russia – China and Russia have decided to renounce the US dollar and resort to using their own currencies for bilateral trade, Premier Wen Jiabao and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin announced late on Tuesday.

Chinese experts said the move reflected closer relations between Beijing and Moscow and is not aimed at challenging the dollar, but to protect their domestic economies.
“About trade settlement, we have decided to use our own currencies,” Putin said at a joint news conference with Wen in St. Petersburg.

The two countries were accustomed to using other currencies, especially the dollar, for bilateral trade. Since the financial crisis, however, high-ranking officials on both sides began to explore other possibilities.

The yuan has now started trading against the Russian rouble in the Chinese interbank market, while the renminbi will soon be allowed to trade against the rouble in Russia, Putin said.

“That has forged an important step in bilateral trade and it is a result of the consolidated financial systems of world countries,” he said.

Putin made his remarks after a meeting with Wen. They also officiated at a signing ceremony for 12 documents, including energy cooperation.

The documents covered cooperation on aviation, railroad construction, customs, protecting intellectual property, culture and a joint communiqu. Details of the documents have yet to be released.

Putin said one of the pacts between the two countries is about the purchase of two nuclear reactors from Russia by China’s Tianwan nuclear power plant, the most advanced nuclear power complex in China.

Putin has called for boosting sales of natural resources – Russia’s main export – to China, but price has proven to be a sticking point.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin, who holds sway over Russia’s energy sector, said following a meeting with Chinese representatives that Moscow and Beijing are unlikely to agree on the price of Russian gas supplies to China before the middle of next year.

Russia is looking for China to pay prices similar to those Russian gas giant Gazprom charges its European customers, but Beijing wants a discount. The two sides were about $100 per 1,000 cubic meters apart, according to Chinese officials last week.

Wen’s trip follows Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s three-day visit to China in September, during which he and President Hu Jintao launched a cross-border pipeline linking the world’s biggest energy producer with the largest energy consumer.

Wen said at the press conference that the partnership between Beijing and Moscow has “reached an unprecedented level” and pledged the two countries will “never become each other’s enemy”.

Over the past year, “our strategic cooperative partnership endured strenuous tests and reached an unprecedented level,” Wen said, adding the two nations are now more confident and determined to defend their mutual interests.

“China will firmly follow the path of peaceful development and support the renaissance of Russia as a great power,” he said.

“The modernization of China will not affect other countries’ interests, while a solid and strong Sino-Russian relationship is in line with the fundamental interests of both countries.”

Wen said Beijing is willing to boost cooperation with Moscow in Northeast Asia, Central Asia and the Asia-Pacific region, as well as in major international organizations and on mechanisms in pursuit of a “fair and reasonable new order” in international politics and the economy.

Sun Zhuangzhi, a senior researcher in Central Asian studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said the new mode of trade settlement between China and Russia follows a global trend after the financial crisis exposed the faults of a dollar-dominated world financial system.

Pang Zhongying, who specializes in international politics at Renmin University of China, said the proposal is not challenging the dollar, but aimed at avoiding the risks the dollar represents.

Wen arrived in the northern Russian city on Monday evening for a regular meeting between Chinese and Russian heads of government.

He left St. Petersburg for Moscow late on Tuesday and is set to meet with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Wednesday.

Beyond risk off

So it was buy the rumor, buy the news, then watch it all fall apart a few days later.

QE was a major international event, with the word being that the ‘money printing’ would not only take down the dollar, but also spread ‘liquidity’ to the rest of the world through the US banking system, via some kind of ‘carry trades’ and who knows what else, or needed to know. It was just obvious…

So the entire world was front running QE in every currency, commodity, and equity market.

And the Fed announcement only brought in more international players, with money printing headlines screaming globally.

Then the ‘risk off’ unwinding phase started, reversing what had been driven by maybe three themes:

1. There were those who knew all along QE probably did not do anything of consequence, but went along for the ‘risk on’ ride believing others believed QE worked and would drive prices accordingly.

2. A group that thought originally QE might do something and piled in, but began having second thoughts about how effective QE might actually be after learning more about it, and decided to get out.

3. A third group who continue to believe QE does work, who got cold feed when they started doubting whether the Fed would actually follow through with enough QE, also for two reasons.
   a. the FOMC itself made it clear opinion was highly polarized, often for contradictory reasons
   b. the economy showed signs of modest growth that cast doubts on whether the Fed might
   think something as ‘powerful and risky’ as QE was still needed.

Reminds me some of the old quip- the food was terrible and the portions were small-
(QE is questionable policy and they aren’t going to do enough of it.)

So risk off continues in what have become fundamentally illiquid markets until some time after the speculative longs have been sold and the shorts covered.

Next question, what about after the smoke clears?

A. The dollar could remain strong even after the initial short covering ends- the modest GDP growth is slowly tightening fiscal, and crude oil prices are falling, both of which make dollars ‘harder to get’

It’s starting a kind of virtuous cycle where the stronger dollar moves crude lower which strengthens the dollar.
Also, the J curve works in reverse with other imports as well. As imports get cheaper, initially
the rest of world gets fewer dollars from exports to the US, until/unless volumes pick up.

The euro zone is again struggling with the idea of the ECB supporting the weaker members with secondary market bond purchases, as ECB imposed austerity measures are showing signs of decreasing revenues of the more troubled members. Seems taxpayers of the core members are resisting allowing the ECB to support the weaker members, and the core leaders are groping for something that works politically and financially. All this adds risk to holding euro financial assets, as even a small threat of a breakup jeopardizes the very existence of the euro.

Japan is on the way to fiscal easing while the US, UK, and euro zone are attempting to tighten fiscal.

Falling commodity prices hurt the commodity currencies.

B. Interest rates are moving higher as spec longs who bought the QE rumor and news are getting out.
But it looks to me like term rates could again move back down after this sell off has run its course.
The Fed still failing on both mandates- real growth is still modest at best, and the 0 rate policy is deflationary/contractionary enough for even a 9% budget deficit not to do much more than support gdp at muddling through levels, with a far too high output gap/unemployment rate.
And falling commodities, weak stocks, and a strong dollar give the Fed that much more reason not to hike.

C. A mixed bag for stocks.
Equity values have fallen after running up on the QE rumor/news, further supported by the dollar weakness that came with the QE rumor news, with the equity sell off now exacerbated by the dollar rally which hurts earnings translations and export prospects.

But a 9% federal deficit is still chugging away, adding to incomes and savings of financial assets, and providing for modest top line growth and ok earnings via cost cutting as well.

Fiscal risks include letting the tax cuts expire and proactive spending cuts by the new Congress which seems committed to austerity type measures.

Low interest rates help valuations but reduce the economy’s interest income.

China acting more like the inflation problem is serious. Hearing talk of price controls, as they struggle to sustain employment and keep a lid on prices, in a nation where inflation or unemployment have meant regime change. Looks to me like a slowdown can’t be avoided with the western educated kids now mostly in charge.

>   
>   (email exchange)
>   
>   On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Paul wrote:
>   
>   Very interesting — but I have a question:
>   
>   What if the deficit causes “saving” increase in financial assets held by
>   foreigners (via the trade imbalance) rather than US domestic households?
>   

Hi Paul!

That would mean we would get the additional benefit of enjoying a larger trade deficit, which means for a given size govt taxes can be that much lower.

Or, if we get sufficient domestic private sector deficit spending, govt deficit spending can remain the same and we benefit by the enhanced real terms of trade supported by the increased foreign savings desires.

Except of course policy makers don’t get it and squander the benefit of a larger trade deficit/better real terms of trade with a too low federal deficit (taxes too high for the given level of govt) that sadly results in domestic unemployment- currently a real cost beyond imagination.

Fundamentally, exports are real costs and imports real benefits, and net imports are a function of foreign savings desires.

So the higher the foreign savings desires the better the real terms of trade.

Also, with floating exchange rates, the way I see it, it’s always ‘in balance’ as the trade deficit = foreign savings desires.

Best!
Warren