“I don’t know if I will live to see it,” said Brazil’s president Luiz (Lula) da Silva a couple weeks ago. “But Brazil has to transform itself into a big power in the 21st century. We have everything to make it happen. We are not talking about a little country here.”

No, indeed. Brazil is not “a little country” anymore. Any prudent investor has to consider how to hitch a ride on the Brazil growth story. Brazil is transforming into one of the world’s great powers in this century. It’s important to follow the news from Brazil. At the same time, you have to know where to look, and how to read between the lines.

By official count — what the Brazilian government will confirm — the rocks of Brazil hold nearly 20 billion barrels of proven reserves. That number is on par with the total for U.S. oil reserves, including Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico.

It’s an impressive number, but then there’s also the unofficial Brazilian reserve count. How much oil is “really” down there under Brazilian jurisdiction? It depends with whom you talk. Some Brazilian officials will smile and say the country has 50 billion barrels of resources. If the Brazilians can tap into this treasure, it adds up to more than twice the total reserves of the U.S., including Alaska.

Other knowledgeable — VERY knowledgeable — Brazilians give much larger estimates. I’ve seen estimates that place the resource number at “over 100 billion barrels.” This puts Brazil in with the largest of the large oil nations, such as Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

These massive oil resources offshore Brazil lie beneath deep water and thick layers of salt. And since it’s all within Brazilian waters, the government of Brazil is increasing its control over offshore development. This way, Brazil will have its own oilmen keeping an eye out for the overall national interest — and making big money for the Brazilian treasury.

The new level of Brazil’s state control over oil development is a strategic decision. Brazil is counting on the hydrocarbon resources to help propel it forward as one of the world’s major powers. And the development in Brazil will control the destiny of a good number of players in the OI portfolio.

Many companies whose fate is tied to the wheel of the Brazilian ship of state are in that portfolio. All of them have operations that span the globe. They’re not a pure play on Brazilian energy development. Just the same, it’s nice to know that they’ll be pulling down a big chunk of business in one booming region over the next couple of decades. As I see it, these firms are long-term core holdings for any diversified energy portfolio.

Gold on the Move

This week, the price of gold touched $1,040 per ounce. Silver also took the elevator to higher floors, to now over $17 per ounce. It’s been good news for all of the gold and silver miners in the OI portfolio.

We’re way up on many of the miners I’ve added this year to the OI portfolio. Some of the beaten-down guys are also showing us their inner Lazarus as precious metals prices soar.

What’s with the Rising Tide?

I just love it when the stocks in the OI portfolio are going up. It beats the heck out of what we experienced last October with the meltdown, that’s for sure. And it makes it easier to be the editor of a financial newsletter that focuses on precious metals, energy and other natural resources.

What’s going on? What’s with the rising tide? I believe we’re seeing some short covering in the precious metals arena. It has always amazed me in the past couple of years that there were people out there shorting gold. Huh? It’s like that scene from the movie The Deer Hunter in which Robert De Niro is playing Russian roulette with a pistol holding bullets in the chambers. You don’t have to be crazy to short gold, but it helps.

I may not have the same eyesight today as back when I flew Navy jets. But how close do you have to look to see that the U.S. dollar is in trouble? Yet people still want to bet on the dollar and against gold? Hey, it’s a free country. And I’ve spent the past few years feeling pretty lonely at times as I described my vision of monetary gloom and doom.

So now the dollar is dropping due to bad news on many fronts. The U.S. economy is NOT “recovering,” contrary to the propaganda from Washington. Unemployment is up, and it’ll stay up for a long time. There’s a structural readjustment going on within the U.S. economy, and it’ll take years (maybe decades) to play out. Meanwhile, U.S. tax policy, energy policy and the overall political process are a train wreck in living color. Can anyone explain to me how this has a happy ending?

The world, of course, is noticing. Now we read about a group of nations (the usual suspects, but add in modern allies Japan and France) trying to figure out how to ditch the dollar and use some other medium of exchange to trade oil. It’s not exactly a new rumor, but now it’s getting traction. And like people smelling smoke in a crowded theater, dollar holders are looking for the exit signs.

Is anyone surprised at this? How much fiscal and monetary abuse can the greenback stand? Hence, the precious metals prices are levitating.

We’ll probably see a pullback in precious metals prices, but that’s just going to be profit taking and the market working its magic. Long term, the metals are still going up.

It’s part of the long-term thesis of Outstanding Investments. Go with precious metals. Go with energy plays. Go with solid resource plays.

Until we meet again,
Byron King

Source: Energy, Brazil, Gold: What More Could You Want?

And so it begins. Just yesterday, we here at the TFN offices got into a late-day discussion about the fate of the nation’s natural gas markets.

With prices remaining low and entirely removed from the recent commodities bonanza, the nation’s expanding natural gas drilling industry is headed for trouble.

Today we got the news that proves our theory.

ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP), the third largest of the nation’s Big Oil players, announced it is cutting its capital spending budget by nearly 10% and is selling some $10 billion worth of assets.

Why the drastic moves? Thanks in part to stubbornly low natural gas prices, the company needs to make the cuts to shore up a leveraged balance sheet.

If you recall, just last week the company warned Wall Street to expect reduced earnings figures thanks to a 67% reduction in natural gas prices.

There was similar news yesterday from nation’s second-largest producer, Chevron (NYSE:CVX). The California-based company quietly announced all drilling has stopped at its Piceance Basin facilities in Colorado.

I bet you can guess why they plugged the well. Yep, you betcha, low natural gas prices.

Drill, baby, drill

So if the natural gas price conundrum is having this effect on the nation’s largest companies and their multi-billion dollar cash flows, what is it doing to the tiny, marginal players?

Early last month, Trident Resources gave us a glimpse of what is likely to come. Citing liabilities of nearly a billion bucks and assets worth just $10 million, the Canadian gas driller was forced to walk into bankruptcy court and ask for protection from its creditors.

Indeed, the same companies investors were pumping their money into when gas was soaring to record highs are now failing under the weight of massive debt.

Here’s the kicker that is really going to tear the gas industry apart.

That massive debt that was picked up over the past few years doesn’t simply go away now that prices have plummeted. Drillers still have to pay their bills. That means any bit of cash flow available is direly needed.

That is how we got to where we are today, with natural gas inventories across the country at record high levels and growing by the minute.

With bills to pay, drillers simply refuse to close the valves on their producing wells. If they do, they’ll go bankrupt. But until they slow the flow, the price they get for that gas will sink lower and lower.

Eventually, prices will get so low the weak will be shaken out of the market whether they like it or not. They won’t be able to produce enough gas even to make their weekly payroll.

One of many

I could pick on dozens of small drillers that are facing gale-force headwinds, but since Rex Energy Corp. (NASDAQ:REXX) recently expanded its drilling in the Marcellus Shale formation, which is the chief cause of the current market glut, I will put their issues in the spotlight.

With $70 million in liabilities, the $330 million company is one of the better positioned drillers in its category. But much of that debt is focused on bringing the company to the Marcellus Shale region. If the move does not pay off, Rex could be forced to pay on a dud for quite some time.

Common estimates put the break-even price for Marcellus Shale drilling somewhere around $3.70 per 1,000 cubic feet of gas. Right now, drillers are able to get that price from the futures market, but the overfilled spot market is not willing to spend so much.

With nearly $1.50 difference between spot and future prices, something has got to give. With inventories about to overflow, the spot price won’t budge an inch.

The common argument throughout the market is that typical winter demand will reduce supplies and bring the markets back in equilibrium. But remember, the markets rarely go with the crowd.

The speculators have gas prices going higher over the next two months, but the facts and economic laws show prices will be going lower.

If it happens, it won’t be good for drillers. ConocoPhillips knows it. Now so do you.

Source: Natural Gas Industry Braces for Impact

Qatar’s greatest asset is its natural gas reserves. In fact, the largest gas field in the world is here. Its discoverers were disappointed when they found it in 1971. They were looking for oil.

The boom Qatar now enjoys is the result of some daring investments in liquefied natural gas (LNG) back when people thought doing such a thing was a little batty. Faisal Al Suwaidi, the head of Qatargas, deserves the props for his wager, which have paid off handsomely. Today, Qatar produces about one-quarter of the world’s natural gas.

Qatar supplies such faraway customers as Japan, India and China. Qatargas also operates the largest LNG terminal in Europe at South Hook on the Welsh coast. This facility provides Britain with a fifth of its gas needs.

Qatar’s dominant position has filled its coffers and changed the country forever. On a per capital basis, it is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. And given the world’s growing energy demands and the appeal of clean-burning (and cheaper) natural gas when compared with oil, Qatar seems in a good position.

In Dubai, the story is quite different, as Dubai does not have Qatar’s gas reserves, nor does it have much oil. Dubai’s story is one of trade and finance.

As I write, the sun is just peeking over the horizon. It is dawn in Dubai. Out my hotel window, I can see two buildings with cranes over them and in the distance another building in scaffolding. For a city that was once booming and turned bust – as with most places – there is still a lot of construction going on.

As recently as September 2008, realtors could claim that no one had lost money in the Dubai property market. That’s no longer true. In fact, now the market has too much of just about every property type. One headline story noted how 32,000 homes are about to come on the market next year, which is a big number to choke down in any city. Dubai had a huge property boom and now must suffer the flip side.

The hotels, too, are pretty empty. We are staying at the new Address Hotel downtown, which has been open for only 25 days, we are told. I’m the first person to stay in my room. It still has that new carpet smell.

I wandered down for breakfast and was alone in a cavernous dining room. The hotel is brand-spanking new and everything looks wonderful. It’s just mostly empty. I think there are more hotel workers than there are guests.

In Dubai, revenue per room is down 35% from a year ago. Yet there is still an expansion going on. Next year, estimates call for a 15% increase in the number of rooms. This would mean a 40% increase in two years.

Over breakfast, I perused my complimentary copy of The National. One of the things I like to do in a foreign city is to read the local newspapers. I’m kind of a newspaper junkie anyway – I get three dailies delivered to my doorstep at home. In any event, I always find interesting nuggets from a perspective you might not get if all you read is The Wall Street Journal or Financial Times.

Today’s business page carried an array of tales… There was the arrival in Doha of a new LNG tanker, fresh from Seoul’s shipbuilding docks. There was a story about how UAE consumer confidence is up. Also, notes on bond issues in the Gulf, the latest figures on money supply in Kuwait (it’s rising at a frighteningly quick pace of 18.7%), the price of villas in Dubai and more. All sorts of little odds and ends that help paint the picture.

There was also a lot of chatter about infrastructure, which I found particularly interesting. Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE, which I will visit on this trip, is looking to raise $100 billion for infrastructure projects. From The National: “The emirate needs to fund new transport, electricity and telecommunications schemes…”

Dubai itself also has ambitious infrastructure spending plans. Last night, as we made our way to our hotel, we could see the new Dubai Metro stops along the way, which, lit up as they were in soft blue and white twinkling lights, looked like something out of the future.

Incredibly, the Dubai government last year spent about 45% of its budget on infrastructure projects – mostly on the roads and ports. But there is a lot more on tap, as The National reports:

“Dubai could invest as much as $20 billion in desalination projects in the next decade alone as it increases its water output by 2.72 billion liters a day… [There are also] plans to add 14,405 megawatts by 2017… Construction costs for those new plants amount to $11.6 billion, while infrastructure costs, including substations and transmission lines, will be about $11.6 billion.”

This massive build-out is not unique to Dubai, or even the UAE. There are also big infrastructure projects of all kinds in India and China and other emerging markets.

Regards,

Chris Mayer

Source: Greetings from Qatar!

The team at Casey’s Energy Opportunities believe that planned government buying or selling of crude oil for SPRs actually have very little impact in the overall market. However, an overall drawdown of worldwide inventory could put downward pressure on the price of oil. The various countries also have their particular reasons and influences in decisions to tap their reserves.

So which countries are executing preparedness plans to fill their strategic reserves with $70 oil now (as opposed to $140+)? Below are the 10 countries that consume the most oil in the world, as of 2008, the latest figures available from the BP Statistical Review of World Energy:

Russia, Canada, and Saudi Arabia can leave the list, as they are net exporters of oil and thus do not actually require a strategic reserve, at least in the short term. We’ll also bump Brazil, because its balance of imports is dwindling every year, and it should become a exporter before it requires a reserve. That leaves six countries to examine:

The United States

Not surprisingly, America has the largest strategic reserve in the world in an absolute sense. Its 727 million barrels are stored in four hollowed-out salt domes (and one pending) along the coastline of the Gulf of Mexico. These add up to some 62 days’ worth of imports, according to government sources. The United States government currently has plans to push this to 1 billion barrels, or about 85 days’ worth of imports, which would make the reserves equivalent to those of Japan and Korea.

The SPR build-up will be accomplished by expanding two of the current facilities, for an additional 113 million barrels, and (probably) building a new one in Richton, Missouri, for 160 million barrels. The Richton project has met local opposition, because it would require pumping 50 million gallons of freshwater per day from the Pascagoula River to dissolve enough salt to open up another subterranean cavern. The total cost of the program is estimated at US$3.7 billion, not including the cost to fill the reserves. Oil purchases are likely to be slow, at around 100,000 bpd (barrels per day) before 2014 and 150,000 bpd thereafter.

In a real emergency, the combined American strategic and commercial reserves (the latter held by private corporations, especially refiners) may seem unnervingly thin from the perspective of energy security. Add to that the fact that the government can release them at a rate of only 4.4 million barrels per day, or about half its imports.

Still, the 108 or so days’ reserve it has between government and commercial sources are considered adequate by international standards. The United States has used this reserve twice in the past 20 years (Desert Storm and Hurricane Katrina) to combat severe demand or supply disruptions. It also has the luxury of importing more oil from Canada in an emergency.

Scenarios that could force a sustained drawdown of reserves:

• Sustained hyperinflation in the United States due to actions by the Federal Reserve that causes oil-producing countries to look for better markets to sell oil.

• A prolonged general embargo by OPEC on the United States, forcing America to look to traditional partners such as Canada and Mexico, though they might not have sufficient oil.

• Another war, potentially in North Korea or Iran, requiring a large amount of oil input from America that it simply does not have.

• A particularly active hurricane season that knocks out a large amount of production capacity in the Gulf of Mexico, and the United States releases from the SPR to help.

China

China’s strategic reserves began being built in 2004, when leaders in China began to realize that the country had no adequate government-controlled reserves to combat any disruptions in the supply of oil. China is a large importer and is dependent on the same sources of foreign oil as the United States. China is even more anxious to build such a reserve, as two of its neighbors, Korea and Japan, both have large strategic reserves.

China currently has four government reserves with a total reserve potential of 272 million barrels, which translates to about 30 days’ consumption. Two of the four have been confirmed full, and there are rumors that all four are and that China has taken advantage of the recent precipitous drop in the price of oil to buy up. According to Chinese government sources, however, the reserves are likely not to be completely full until 2010, and 2009 buying of oil will be at around 42 million barrels.

The government has also announced plans to increase the country’s reserve from 30 to 100 days of consumption. The next stage of the development will call for an additional 170 million barrels in eight storage facilities. The locations of the facilities are as yet secret.

In an emergency, China would likely turn to Russia to buy oil, though only the naive would be surprised if Russia added a premium for the privilege.

Scenarios that could force a sustained drawdown of reserves in China:

• Worldwide embargo on China due to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

• High oil prices force Chinese industries out of business, pressuring the government to keep oil prices low domestically by selling some of the reserves to domestic companies.

• North Korea asks for oil from China to support military action on the Korean Peninsula, and China ships it to them on the black market.

• Russia slows or stops its exports as part of the Russian “dominance via energy” strategy, leaving Chinese pipelines trickling and Chinese industries disrupted.

Japan/South Korea

We have placed Japan and South Korea’s reserves together, as the two countries have a treaty that allows them to share their strategic reserves.

Resource-poor Japan has one of the world’s largest strategic oil reserves, enough for 82 days of imports. State-controlled reserves are run by the state-owned Japan Oil, Gas, and Metals National Corporation. The reserves consist of 320 million barrels in 10 different locations, which makes them second only to the United States in absolute volume. Japan’s island geography means that having an emergency supply of crude oil is crucial, and the Japanese government obviously has not ignored this aspect.

South Korea is in one of the global “hotspots” in the world, right beside North Korea. As the country is under an almost constant threat of war, the government has stocked up some 76 million barrels, with capacity for an additional 40 million barrels.

Scenarios that could force a drawdown of reserves:

• Just one at this time, from two possible sources: political instability in the region caused by either the Taiwan or the Korea conundrums disrupts tanker transport, perhaps even forces them to port.

India

India has a small reserve it began to build in 2004. This stockpile is sufficient for perhaps only two weeks of consumption. The country eventually wants to raise this level to 45 days, though the first phase has not even been completed yet. The projects are estimated to come online in 2012, which means it has taken eight years from planning to completion. These figures imply that India will not even have a somewhat sufficient strategic reserve until 2016, given that the expansion project was approved in 2008.

Germany

Germany has the largest reserve in Europe and is among the top in the world as well. Its government has satisfied a federal law that regulates storage be at least 90 days’ worth of net imports. More than half of the storage is in Southern Germany, where large salt caverns exist. Germany is well prepared in its strategic oil reserves, and there are no glaring factors that would force a drawdown of reserves, barring a global catastrophe. Furthermore, the reserves of Germany, France, and Italy are pooled and can be used by any of the three countries in an emergency.

So How Much Do the Reserves Matter?

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates, some 2 billion barrels are held in government-owned strategic reserves around the world. Though this seems like plenty of oil, does it really impact the spot price of oil? Collectively, the answer is yes, as this volume corresponds to 23 days’ worth of global consumption. If drawn down together over a short period of time, the effect on spot price could be substantial.

For illustration’s sake, suppose that countries collectively draw down their entire reserves over the period of a year. This rate would make up for 10% of the daily worldwide trade of crude oil, which could certainly impact price (imagine ConocoPhillips and ExxonMobil both going under at the same time).

Individually, however, even China and the United States have a limited impact on the spot price of oil over a single year. If the United States’ inventory were drawn over an entire year, it would only make for a 4% increase in supply. Under normal buying patterns of each country’s strategic reserves, the impact is even smaller. Since China’s 42-million-barrel purchase is over one year, their purchase would not even make a dent in the daily trade of oil.

Thus, a concerted effort by the worldwide reserves can definitely keep prices down in the short term (within a year, two at best), but cannot make for a paradigm shift in the supply/demand model of oil or the Peak Oil argument. And from the buying side, if governments plan the filling of their strategic reserves, the impact on the spot price of oil is likely to be minimal.

Perception is a tricky horse to ride, however, as we all know. Given a worldwide panic for oil à la the 1973 oil embargo, oil prices could spike in the short term, because government reserves would likely raise purchases 10% or so in a real emergency. This effect would be short lived for the foreseeable future, though, as worldwide reserves are already reaching their limits.

In short, if everything goes according to “plan” by the governments, even filling a large reserve such as the Chinese SPR would have little impact on the price of oil. For SPRs to truly impact the spot price of oil, it would have to be a global situation, with war and embargo the two most likely scenarios. Even then, the impact would be mellowed by limitations on how quickly governments can either release or purchase the oil.

Regards,

Marin Katusa

Source: Who’s Buying Oil?

Not to crunch too many metaphors right here at the top, but a consensus seems to be firming up in the animate jello of the Internet that we have entered the Season of the Witch. An odor of ripeness fills the virtual air — something between dead carp and apples baking.

Whatever else appears to be going on in the upper stories and verdigris-tinged turrets of capital finance — currency rackets, gold switcheroos, interest rate arbitrage games, concealment of losses under rugs and behind curtains, Chinese fire drills performed by Spanish prisoners, executive three-card-monte set-ups, boardroom work-arounds, accounting quicksteps, Peter-to-Paul-shuffles, check kitings, pigeon drops, Ponzi schemes, hugger-muggers, bezels, shucks, jives, and enough monkeyshines to make Lord Greystroke cry for mercy — apart, in other words, from business-as-usual, such as it is these days, on Wall Street, there is a rising collective sense of anxious expectation that things are about to shake loose in the sad-ass shell of what remains of our economy. And the most perplexing part is that there hardly seems any safe place to preserve one’s savings.

The showmen over at the Financial Sense website, have put on an excellent month-long series of interviews and debate podcasts between leading inflationistas and deflationistas — Daniel Amerman, Peter Schiff, Robert Prechter, Mark Faber, Michael “Mish” Shedlock, Harry Dent — and after weeks of sedulous listening I still remain flummoxed as to where to stash the dwindling cash.

Harry Dent was a curious case in point this week. He has made some howlingly wrong calls before (e.g. in 2006, predicting a Dow 40,000 at the conclusion of the post-2001 bubble). Perhaps he missed the crack-up aspect of the most recent boom. He did not foresee the long gruesome meltdown of late 2007 to March 2009, or rather, his timing was off, since he called for the commencement of a new Great Depression in 2010. (And I hasten to insert here that my own timing of events has not been so great either.) Anyway, Dent sees a “winter” of finance and economy looming from here forward, characterized by extreme deflation, based on his view that the amount of private debt going bad (est. $40 trillion) far outweighs government’s ability to create new “money” (a few measily trillion) and hence that there is no chance in hell we’ll find ourselves in an inflationary situation for some time ahead. The private debt workout has to be completed first.

Most curious, though, was when the interviewer, Jim Puplava, probed Dent about his views on Peak Oil. Dent said he didn’t believe in it; that when he was in college in the 1970s (remember the OPEC oil embargo of ‘73), he learned to disregard any suggestions that we are “running out of oil.” He stated this, by the way, as a simple assertion, without any further explanation, and Puplava didn’t belabor him with arguments. But it was a weird moment. Of course, it hardly need be said that Peak Oil story has never been about “running out of oil” per se, but rather about declining flows, geopolitical management of flows, and the effects of depletion on industrial economies — in particular the effect on regular, expected, cyclical “growth” of the type that financial markets utterly depend on to power the trade in investment paper.

It is exceedingly odd that this does not factor into Dent’s thinking, because what Peak Oil inescapably does is introduce the very sobering idea of discontinuity — that is, that the game has changed radically, especially where all our assumptions about continued “growth” are concerned. In that brief exchange on Peak Oil, Dent seemed to take the position that the “winter” part of any historical financial cycle always produced “new technology” that invariably saves the day, putting this seemingly very smart man in the camp of so many techno-cornucopian triumphalists all wishing for the same outcome: that some mythical “they” will “come up with” a set of rescue remedies to keep all the cars circulating on the freeways, and all the WalMarts groaning with swag.

Like so many major league prognosticators, Dent arrives at his ideas by building models of reality, assembling “data” to create charts of trends in prices, interest rates, and especially demographics – what age group of people are buying a lot of what in which stage of their lives. The whole business seems very rational and reasonable except when you realize that it is just another “narrative” — to borrow one of Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s terms — girded with statistical justification. One can hardly fault it from a strictly procedural point of view — since, in our culture, conclusions ought to proceed from evidence — but one can’t escape the feeling that it amounts to little more than old-fashioned augury… that someone examining the entrails of a dead chicken, spread over the front page of The Wall Street Journal, might arrive at very similar conclusions. All that said, Dent was an appealingly confident personality on-the-air, the kind of authoritative voice you’d like to believe, if only it were possible.

Prechter was much the same a few weeks earlier, and he, too, foresees a darker American future, based on a different set of models called Elliot Wave principles. His forecasts derive from a picture of “social mood” as much as economic data flows. He, too seems to disregard the Peak Oil story and its implications as the master resource driving growth in industrial economies.

Personally, I am not at all sure that the Peak Oil story, or its associated general resource scarcity story, will shed a whole lot of light on the question of inflation-or-deflation. I say this because I think it is a short way down the road of depletion-and-scarcity before the major complex systems we depend on for daily life become so unstable that general socio-economic collapse ensues. After all, capital finance is only one of these many complex systems — some other biggies being food production, trade and manufacture, transportation, electric power distribution, infrastructure maintenance, the military, and governance. Inflation-or-deflation will only be symptomatic of larger failures and instabilities in these systems necessary for modern, civilized life.

All of it begs the question not only whether you or I will have two nickels to rub together, or two gold eagles, or a bundle of six month US Treasury bills, or a zillion shares of Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL), or a gainful vocation, or a roof over our heads, or a hot meal at the end of the day, or a safe place to sleep, or a country we can recognize. I’ve done my share of forecasting, with some episodes of notably bad timing. I don’t do it for grandstanding effect but to provide some basis for knowing what to do in the years directly ahead, so we can hope to construct lives worth living. I’m impatient with models, charts, and statistical analysis. Perhaps this is childish. I’d rather tell a story or paint a picture. So, I’m going to spend the rest of the week finishing the last chapter of World Made By Hand Two: The Witch of Hebron while the US economy wanders where it will.

Regards,
James Howard Kunstler

Source: Inflation, Deflation, Peak Oil and Complex Systems

Unfortunately, that’s not the case. And that means Constellation will have to clear a number of hurdles if it’s going to fulfill its long-term promise.
Last year, the company bet big on higher energy prices and paid the price dearly when the economy collapsed.

Constellation’s very high level of debt, with large bond maturities in 2009 and 2012 at that time meant they were flirting with financial disaster.  That forced the company into a deal with Électricité de France SA (EDF), in which the European energy giant agreed to inject $4.5 billion into Constellation in exchange for almost 50% ownership of its nuclear plants.

That includes a brand new plant, Calvert Cliffs 3, that’s still subject to pending regulatory approval. Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley has convinced the Public Service Commission (PSC) to hold open, public hearings to determine if this new deal is in the public’s best interest.

One of the main points of contention is the two energy companies’ demand to access the cash at distributing subsidiary Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. (BGE).

“We know that BGE is a cash cow for Constellation Energy,” said Gov. O’Malley. “We know that BGE pays more than half of all dividends paid into Constellation Energy and has a huge impact on Constellation’s bottom line.  We also know that Constellation Energy has had a tumultuous history over these last few years.”

The Maryland governor also noted that Constellation last year lost 80% of its stock value and was just hours away from bankruptcy before EDF stepped in.

Potential construction costs associated with the new nuclear plant are another large uncertainty. Nuclear plants have the tendency to run over budget, and that means the utilities then come back to regulators asking for rate increases in order to fund the cost overruns.

On the other hand, EDF Vice President John Morris recently testified to the PSC that “a decision denying EDF’s application or imposing conditions on the approval of the application that cause it to fail, would bring an end to the development” of the project.

And the company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Pierre Gadonneix, told French lawmakers that EDF expects to get all the necessary approvals for this transaction by the end of the year.

The approval would generate strong economic gains for the state of Maryland, where EDF’s U.S. headquarters are based.

Électricité de France, a firm owned 84% by the French government has its own challenges.  Having bought British Energy Group PLC and embarked in other growth-oriented investments, it too got caught with too much debt. Like Constellation, EDF is in debt-reduction mode.  The company is rumored to be pondering the sale of another 20% stake in British Energy, a swap of electricity assets with German utility E.On AG and the possible float of another 14% of its own stock.

We must also factor in the possibility that destructive protectionism will affect the deal.  The Obama administration recently levied special import duties on Chinese tires.  When governments are forced to confront the tough realities of high unemployment, the likelihood that they resort to protectionism to boost local employment is high.  And this always conspires against efficiency and global growth.

Fortunately, there is no evidence of any such pressure playing a role yet.

In addition to the many uncertainties about the EDF deal and the Calvert Cliffs plant, we have to deal with regulatory uncertainties that are plaguing the industry.  Evolving environmental regulations will require large increases in capital investments.  These eventually are passed on to consumers, reducing demand.  In the months and years ahead, we might see so-called “cap-and-trade” legislation, smart grid systems and renewable portfolio standards that will complicate things even more in unpredictable ways.

The cap-and-trade legislation, should it pass, could benefit Constellation greatly.  If the United States made a stronger commitment to reducing carbon emissions, nuclear would have to be a big part of the equation. And Constellation already is well positioned to take advantage of this.  But while such regulation would be good for the company in the long run, right now it is just another uncertainty.

We also need to remember that a new nuclear power plant in the United States hasn’t been built in 20 years, so a new labor force and supply chain is needed.  And despite the fact that with the support of EDF, Constellation is the largest nuclear operator in the world, these challenges cannot be achieved overnight.

We are not going to go into the Constellation results in detail.  Demand was down in the United States in general, the summer was mild, and industrial demand – which is down between 3% and 7% in different regions – is not coming back yet.

Constellation has indeed taken steps to reduce its trading and other risks and divested several non-profitable operations.  The vast majority of Constellation’s June 30 earnings were due to special items that boosted GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) earnings.  The special one-time items from divested earnings accounted for about 60% of the strong upside adjustment. But they are not likely to recur, and in this complex business, some other one-time items have the unfortunate trait of appearing out of nowhere – just when it is least convenient to shareholders.

I love Constellation’s strong operating performance, its strong position in nuclear energy, and its focus on growing alternative energy.  These strengths are likely to play out well over the long term, and could even lead this company to superior profits down the line.  But there are too many uncertainties weighing on an already damaged balance sheet, which makes the risk for this company too large to bear in the short term.

If Constellation is hit by any one of these risks, another big hit to the stock could lead to another equity infusion.  And the traditional argument for buying utility stocks as an income investment does not work well either, given its low dividend yield and the company’s need to conserve cash.

So, with so much left to chance, I would not buy Constellation at this time. But there is enough long-term potential, that if I already owned Constellation stock, I would hold it for a while to see if those uncertainties are resolved. But be aware that holding the stock is an overly speculative position that needs to be monitored constantly for the developments that we outlined above.

Shares of Constellation Energy closed Friday down 1.45%, or 47 cents, at $31.84. The stock earlier this month hit a 52-week high of $33.37 after falling to a 52-week low of $15 in March.

Recommendation: Hold Constellation Energy Group Inc. (NYSE: CEG) (**).

Source: Constellation Energy Group Inc. Has Long-Term Potential, But Short-Term Problems

Oil peaked at $147 per barrel in July 2008 — right before the house of cards came crashing down on the global economy. Once banks started to fail and credit dried up, other businesses slowed production and laid off workers. This created a massive trickle effect on the overall economy.

Big corporations and individual consumers alike were using less energy. That meant the prices of every energy-related commodity plummeted.

This spring, things started to turn around… The unemployment rate quit falling at such a rapid rate. Inventories were too low in many industries, creating a ramp up in production again. Energy prices climbed…

Since the start of this year, the price of crude oil has nearly doubled. In just the last six months, heating oil jumped as much as 90%. These two commodities are still cheap as far as we can tell. But they aren’t the real story…

Two other commodities are still low, but won’t be for long…

Coal and Natural Gas Are Commodity Buddies

Back in June, Greg Guenthner told you about coal’s recent history. Coal, being the most widely used fossil fuel in the U.S., took an extra-hard hit during the past several months. It’s down nearly 70% and hasn’t recovered in the slightest.

Demand will flood back into the system. In fact, that’s already happening. We have no doubt that the coal play we let our Penny Stock Fortunes readers in on is the best way to take advantage of the coming coal boom. But there’s another energy commodity about to shoot even higher, even faster…

Natural gas prices have utterly collapsed. After trading above $13 in June 2008, natural gas fell the whole way down to $2.70 today. Its decline happened as gradually as can be. Most of the financial world has been trying to time the bottom for months. But it keeps falling.

We don’t know if this is the bottom, but it can’t be far from it. It doesn’t matter to us even if it’s not. You see, we found the best natural gas seasonal laborer in the world, and we can just wait it out… no matter how long it takes.

Before we get into any specific natural gas play, we need to know how big natural gas’s recovery will be…

Why We’ll See Natural Gas 209% Higher By Year-End

Natural gas and coal go hand in hand. They are oftentimes found together in the same place. Natural gas hides beneath and between coal beds. It’s not uncommon for a coal company to come in and mine the same site an oil and natural gas driller just left.

When one of these two is no longer in demand, it usually spells trouble for the other. That’s one of the main reasons natural gas has taken such a hit. But just as they fall together, they rise together.

We already laid out the reason coal will see a price spike in coming months and years. Natural gas is just as lucrative, if not more…

Natural gas demand is continuing to increase around the world at an unprecedented pace. Many nations are starting to choose NG over traditional coal and oil in power plants. It burns about 29% cleaner than petroleum and 44% cleaner than coal.

And because of its recent price collapse, it’s now the cheapest choice for customers. Why pay more for coal or oil when you can get natural gas for $2.50 per thousand cubic feet?

The supply side of the coin is even more compelling…

The U.S. imports around 17% of its natural gas — almost all of which comes from Canada. Unfortunately, Canada’s natural gas reserves are drying up. Daily Canadian natural gas production peaked in 2001. We’re already back down to 1995 production levels, and falling.

Natural gas production here in the U.S. has also fallen off a cliff. Most drillers can’t drill for a profit at these prices. So they aren’t. We have almost no production right now. We’ll eventually burn through stored natural gas reserves. When they go too low, it will spur a panic.

This panic will be enormous. Natural gas is simply too cheap. It hasn’t been this cheap for decades. The average oil-to-natural gas price ratio is about 9.3. Now it’s at about 29.

It wouldn’t take much for prices to shoot upward from here. To reach the 20-year average natural gas-to-oil ratio, NG prices would have to climb 209%.

That doesn’t take into account the future boom in demand. It won’t take long for it to correct itself…certainly before the end of this year.

This panic is inevitable, and there are a number of penny stock plays that could take advantage of it… Union Drilling (NASDAQ: UDRL) and Pioneer Drilling (AMEX: PDC) are two that could be worth looking at right now.

Sincerely,
Jim Nelson

Source: Natural Gas’ Triple Could Give Us a 416% Gain by Year-End

Back in the 1960s and 1970s, a few major companies took out oil exploration concessions there from the government of South Africa. In 1974, Shell (NYSE: RDS.A / RDS.B) discovered a gas field off the southwest coast with the Kudu project. Early estimates were 1 trillion cubic feet of reserves, but current estimates range up to 10 trillion. Kudu was big, but nobody much cared about natural gas back then. Gas was too cheap, and southern Africa was too far away.

There was hardly any development around Kudu for the next 20 years. South Africa was under international sanctions due to its apartheid regime, so oil companies and other outside investment stayed away. Almost nothing happened with energy development until Namibia became independent in 1990.

By the early 1990s, the gas field at Kudu intrigued foreign oil companies. Kudu showed a large hydrocarbon resource. Clearly, there was significant potential. But nobody really understood the offshore geology. Plus, back then, it was tough to drill in water more than about 1,500 feet deep. Namibia didn’t make for an investment magnet.

But with the recent success of offshore Brazil, the energy exploration expectations of the world have been fundamentally altered. The same brilliant researchers and scientists that discovered the potential of Brazil’s Tupi field are now doing extensive research in offshore West Africa, in particular offshore Namibia. One researcher I’ve been following very closely believes the offshore areas of Namibia are ‘geologic analogues’ to Brazil.

Source: The Next Great Oil Frontier

And with good reason. The United States has a bigger and more-troubled financial sector than most countries. It also has a bigger overhang from the housing bubble, has a bigger balance-of-payments deficit and has a budget deficit that’s fat enough to stall the recovery.

It would be nice to have an economic recovery to invest in that didn’t have all of these problems.

Truth be told, such an investment play does exist. What’s more, the market I have in mind is advanced enough for us to invest in it without having to go through all the rigmarole of American Depository Receipt (ADR) investing. Nor will you have to make a potentially risky foray out onto some foreign stock exchange to buy the shares, because they are almost all listed here.

The country I’m talking about is Canada. Think of it as being like home – but without the problems that our home market (the United States) currently suffers from.

Our Healthy Neighbor to the North

When the recession struck, Canada was hit by it quite badly, but for different reasons from its southern neighbor. The Canadian housing market was nowhere near as overheated as its U.S. counterpart. So Canada’s housing downturn wasn’t as deep.

And what about the banking systems? To be sure, Canadian banks received a bailout, but it was less than $20 billion in total. Compare that to the veritable alphabet soup of U.S. bailout programs ranging from “TARP” and “TALF” that have injected more than $2 trillion into the U.S. financial system.

On the other hand, natural resources prices crashed last autumn, which had a major effect on Canada’s resource-based economy. A number of large projects in the Athabasca Tar Sands region were cancelled, for example – since this region has oil reserves around the size of the entire Middle East, its development is crucial to Canada’s future.

The “loonie,” Canada’s currency, declined from around “parity” to the U.S. dollar to an exchange ratio of C$1.30=$1 U.S. In effect, this was a “flight to safety” into the dollar and U.S. Treasuries. And it affected Canada as it did other countries.

In 2009, however, Canada and the United States have traveled down totally different paths. Canada did very little “stimulus,” so its state budget is in much better shape. The deficit for the 2009-2010 fiscal year $53 billion (C$56 billion) is only about 4% of gross domestic product (GDP). For the 2010-2011 fiscal year, the deficit is expected to be about $42 billion (C$45 billion), or 3.2% of GDP.

Energy Powers the Rally

The bounce in natural resources prices has really helped power up the rebound of Canada’s market.

Investment in the tar-sands region has picked up again, with a big merger between the two largest tar-sands-extraction companies: Suncor Energy Inc. (NYSE: SU) and Petro-Canada. The rising gold price hasn’t hurt either – mines are appearing all over the place! All this new activity has made the loonie bounce, so it’s back to about C$1.07=$1. While interest rates are as low as the United States, the Bank of Canada hasn’t done much “quantitative easing,” meaning that inflation isn’t too much of a worry.

The strong loonie helps here, too.

Canada seems to be recovering nicely. Its index of leading indicators jumped 1.1% in August, while manufacturing sales grew 5.5% in July. The country presently runs a modest current account deficit, but it’s only 2% of GDP. That’s much lower than even the current U.S. deficit, let alone that of 2007. It had a little more public debt than the United States in 2008, but given current U.S. deficits, those two lines almost certainly have crossed by now.

There are two caveats. The first is an obvious one: If commodity prices crash to earth, Canada will have some difficulty because commodities are a large part of its economy. Personally, I don’t see that happening. It’s notable that PetroChina Co. Ltd. (NYSE ADR: PTR) has just invested $1.7 billion in a Canadian tar sands project, so China must not think so, either.

The other risk is political. The current minority Conservative government of Stephen Harper has done a good job, but the opposition Liberals have withdrawn their parliamentary support. That means there may be an election this autumn. A Liberal majority government would be no disaster. They might be a bit sticky about oil-drilling permits, but would not otherwise rock the boat.

However, a Liberal coalition with the leftist New Democrats could push public spending and the deficit up, and there’s no guarantee against that. (One of the problems with multi-party systems like Canada’s is there is an almost infinite variety of possible governments after each election, some of which can be fairly alarming from a business perspective.)

However, Canadian elections are a much smaller risk than you get in most countries, and the commodity/oil price crash, if it happened, would help the U.S. economy and, presumably, your U.S. portfolio. So it’s worth having some Canadian exposure, perhaps with the Canadian market exchange traded fund (ETF) iShare MSCI Canada Index (NYSE: EWC).

For years it was almost fashionable to dismiss Canada from an economic standpoint. Now, however, that may well be where the smart money would like to go. As an economy, Canada is competent and stable.

It’s the kind of country that looks to be a good place for some of our money.

It’s a world shrouded in deep myths and folklore that include stories of people losing their homes, or having 5,000 bushels of soybeans dumped on their front lawn.

I’m talking about the commodities world, of course.

But despite these tall tales, commodities aren’t necessarily dangerous investments. Not if you know what you’re doing and take adequate precautions. Rather, the “secret society” stuff comes from the belief that the sector is a murky one that many investors simply don’t understand. Just the mere sound of “commodity futures and futures options contracts” was enough to send people running for cover…

However, nothing could be further from the truth when dealing with commodities. And over the past few years, we’ve seen great changes in the financial world that have opened the doors to this “secret society.”

Step Out of Your Comfort Zone… Don’t Be Afraid of Futures & Futures Options

I’ll tell you what I’ve told my friends and acquaintances over the years: Don’t be scared of commodity futures and futures options, they’re essentially little different than stock and stock options. If you know how to trade stocks and stock options, then there’s no difference from futures and futures options.

For example, if you can buy and sell IBM (NYSE: IBM) shares and IBM options, then why can’t you buy and sell sugar futures and sugar options? There is no difference. As long as you have an idea of where an investment (be it IBM or sugar) might move to and its underlying fundamentals, then what is there to be scared about?

Here’s the problem as I see it (based on my 18 years of experience in the commodities sector): Most people just don’t know enough about the underlying fundamentals of commodities – how/why soybeans, cocoa, cotton, or live cattle trade in a certain way. The majority of people know stocks and that’s that. They don’t like change and are fearful to step out of their comfort zone.

But all commodities that are available to trade on various U.S. exchanges are highly regulated. They have strict rules, which are efficient and assure the integrity and safety of your capital.

So if you’re looking to add some great potential gains to your portfolio, then consider what commodities can do for you…

Four Commodities… Four Explosive Moves

Want some examples of how explosive the world of commodities can be? Just look at these moves for oil, natural gas, gold and silver over the past year…

How would you have liked to hop aboard some of those moves?

Oil: When it started rising in 2007 and topped in 2008, it encompassed a staggering $90,000 move if you’d held just one contract. And the freefall that ended last March brought in an unheard of $110,000 for anyone being bearish.

If you’d held 10 contracts during those moves, you could have seen gains of over $1 million! And that’s just one direction. Double it if you went both ways.

Natural Gas: The move up in the summer of 2007 to the top in 2008 encompassed an $85,000 move, while the drop back down to the lows hit just two weeks ago and saw an even larger haul of $110,000. And this was for holding just one measly little contract. Imagine if you had 100 contracts.

Gold: From the gold chart below, you can see the trend higher from 2002. But even if you got onboard as late as 2006, the move could still have netted you $45,000.

Silver: A bullish position taken in 2006 would have scored $60,000 on just one contract. And if you’d hopped on the bear train near the highs in the spring of 2008, you could have pocketed another $65,000 just six months later.

This is some serious money folks.

And the great thing about commodities is that it’s normal for them to cycle from highs to lows and then back again. This gives you opportunities to profit on the way up and the way down. Moreover, it’s in contrast to the stock market, where most moves are biased to the upside.

Now, if you want to profit today…

Three Reasons Why You Should Trade These Four ETFs

Due to the changes that have taken place in the commodities world, regular investors have a chance to take part in the sector without leaving the comfort of a stockbroker.

We’re talking about commodity-related exchange-traded-funds (ETFs), which mimic the moves of the underlying asset. So you can use them to play some of the most popular and active commodity markets.

For example, if you’d like to go for oil, natural gas, gold, and silver, consider these ETFs:

• Oil: United States Oil Fund (NYSE: USO)
• Natural Gas: United States Natural Gas Fund (NYSE: UNG)
• Gold: SPDR Gold Shares (NYSE: GLD)
• Silver: iShares Silver Trust (NYSE: SLV)

If you want to gain exposure to the often lucrative commodities world, here’s why you should trade these ETFs…

1. Simple: ETFs trade like stocks, so you can buy and sell them as you would with shares of any other company from a regular stock brokerage account. So you don’t even need to get involved with commodity brokers, futures, or futures options contracts.
2. Options: The ETFs also have options available, which offers you more leverage and can reduce your risk.
3. Liquidity: Because all four of these ETFs are the largest ones available for their respective commodities, there is enough volume to be able to get in and out quickly and safely.

Next time, I’ll show you one of my favorite ways to use an options strategy to execute a bullish commodity trade. But in the meantime, check out those ETFs above.

Good trading,

Lee Lowell

Source: Four Easy Ways to Trade the World’s Top Commodities