In fact, the decline in U.S. oil consumption will be quite painful for pretty much every American. Prices for fuel will rise, and you will wish that was the only problem. Spot shortages will turn into large scale “dry outs.”

You should anticipate that every level of government will do things to discourage using liquid fuel, from charging user fees and “congestion pricing” to higher taxes. Heck, the government might even appeal to your patriotism to drive less. And don’t be surprised to see rationing in one form or another, even with expensive fuel and costly fees and taxes.

But this is not a book review of James Howard Kunstler’s 2005 volume The Long Emergency, or his recently released (and exceedingly well-written) World Made By Hand. The point is that oil use will fall in the years to come, because world oil output is falling. You cannot use what is not there in the first place.

***********************************

A Hushed and Private Invitation FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. . .

The Agora Financial Reserve is the most intimate, elite inner circle out of our 97,000 paid subscribers.

The Reserve is simple: You get almost every single newsletter and options research service Agora Financial currently publishes for as long as we publish them. You also get almost every single product we launch in the future. You get almost every single special research report we write. For as long as we publish them — or for as long as you want.

And you get all of that — for life — for less than the cost of one year of all of those services. Check it out now…

***********************************

Setting the Stage for CTL

So this sets the stage to explain why Coal to Liquid (CTL) is about to simply take off in the U.S. The U.S. will adopt CTL, because it has to do so. There are few other large-scale industrial alternatives. Windmills, biofuels, conservation and every other energy-saving and energy-extending idea will help. But the world we live in is built to run on oil, and nothing else will cut it for some things when it comes to running a fast-transforming economy. So stand by for CTL.

According to a 2006 estimate by the National Coal Council, a robust CTL industry could produce about 2.6 million barrels per day of oil-equivalent fuel by 2025. This is about 12.5% of current U.S. daily demand. But it is tricky to draw comparisons over time frames of nearly 20 years. Certainly, a lot of things will change between now and 2025 in the realms of both demand and supply.

And a large-scale CTL program will dramatically increase the demand for coal. Can U.S. mines deliver? There are issues here, to be sure. The U.S. is supposed to have that mythical “250 years of coal reserves, at present rates of consumption.” But that estimate is 35 years old. And much U.S. coal is buried deep, in thin seams, and thus hard to mine. Plus, some 40% of U.S. coal resources are in Alaska — much of it north of the Arctic Circle. So even with coal, the U.S. needs to be wary of believing its own press releases.

***********************************

Potential 250% Gain This Year — If You Get in By July 12

The U.S. Department of Energy says it could be the key to unlocking an oil deposit in the Rocky Mountains that’s three times the size of Saudi Arabia’s reserves.

I say it could make you $65,500 inside of a year.

Let me tell you why that’s such a big deal.

***********************************

Still, CTL can serve as a liquid fuel supplement for at least several decades. And CTL technology is pretty well developed, based on many decades of operational success by Sasol in South Africa. The Air Force believes that the CTL plants of the future can even be relatively “green,” based on evolving technology for removing pollutants from the coal and sequestering carbon dioxide. It will also be possible to reduce the volumes of coal in the blend by adding some types of plant-derived materials.

Thus, it is not a question of if the U.S. will adopt CTL. It is a question of when. And looking ahead, every month is precious. As I said above, we are running out of time. So it will matter greatly how much will we as a nation fool around with our national obsession of navel-gazing over ancillary issues before we get around to making a decision to bend steel.

One way or another, CTL is coming. And one way or another, we at Penny Sleuth are going to find a way to invest in the companies that will build it out.

Until we meet again…
Byron W. King

P.S.: My colleague, Greg Guenthner, is working on an amazing energy play that trades for just a few dollars. If he pulls the trigger, only his elite Penny Stock Fortunes’ readers will gain access to it. To be among these lucky few, click here…

Source: Stand By for CTL

In essence, the Air Force is offering a pilot site for a coal-to-liquid (CTL) project at a base in Montana. This will be the first of many such CTL facilities around the nation. The idea is that funding will come from the private sector, not the Air Force or any other government source.

The Air Force will sweeten the pot, however, by guaranteeing that it will purchase the fuel that comes out of the CTL plants. Eventually, much of the Air Force fleet will fly on a mixture of CTL fuel and traditional petroleum-based fuel. For the past two years or so, the Air Force has been qualifying its planes to fly on synthetic fuels. Just recently, a B-1B “Lancer” bomber went supersonic over New Mexico on a mix of synthetic fuel. So synthetic fuels work.

The Wagon Train Is Forming Up

Some of the synthetic fuels information has made it into various trade press publications. But the major media have pretty much ignored the synthetic fuels development. Even on Wall Street, this program is under the radar screens. I guess the people on Wall Street are too busy counting up their losses from subprime mortgages. But the wagon train is forming up on the trail to synthetic fuels. Things are going to start happening, and soon.

********The Opportunity of a Lifetime********

Why I Will Pay You $6,503 to Cancel Your Agora Financial Subscription Right Now

There’s more than $6 grand staring right at you. All you have to do is decide whether you want it or not.

But don’t worry if you decide – this won’t be the last time Agora Financial will line your pockets with dough…

Read on to cash your $6,503 check…

*************************************

The idea is to jump-start a large U.S. military-industrial CTL program that will eventually serve the rest of the economy. The CTL projects will cost over $5 billion each, based on preliminary estimates. In other words, each CTL refinery will cost about as much as an aircraft carrier, and use about as much steel and equipment.

This ambitious CTL project will have major implications for the future of the coal-mining industry, as well as many companies in the engineering, construction and capital equipment sectors.

Future Liquid Fuel Supplies — We’re Running Out of Time

CTL will surely generate controversy. I cannot begin to describe the visceral opposition to CTL projects from the usual suspects. The NIMBYs, the environmental lobbyists the “global warming” activists and many others will all fight against CTL with tooth and nail. You will hear glib arguments about how “If we just do this or that” (windmills, biofuels, conservation, etc.) we can avoid the need to build any CTL plants. As a nation, we should “do this or that” in any event. Really, we need to do everything. But we will also have to build the CTL plants. The opposition to CTL reflects how deeply the “Just say no” approach is hard-wired into our modern culture.

The U.S. could get away with avoiding major capital investments in energy projects when the dollar was strong and oil was cheap. (How else did we wind up importing two-thirds of our daily oil?) If the U.S. needed oil, we just waved dollars and the tankers showed up at the piers. But no more.

It is crystal clear that the U.S. no longer has long-term assured access to liquid fuels. I hope you got the memo. This reality is rapidly transforming into a supreme matter of national security. A U.S. CTL industry cannot come about too fast, in my view. The nation is not “running out of oil,” technically speaking. But not enough oil can cause just as much havoc as running out. And the national “adult supervision” sure knows that the U.S. is running out of time. Let’s look at the present and forecast the future.

Oil Output and Supply

First, let’s discuss the U.S. oil supply going forward. The U.S. presently consumes about 21 million barrels of oil per day. This is a mix of domestic output (much coming in small quantities from several hundred thousand old stripper wells) and imports.

According to the most recent figures from the U.S. DOE, in January 2008, U.S. crude oil output was just over five million barrels per day, plus additional natural gas liquids. The balance of oil consumption comes from imports. (Also, the U.S. supply of transportation fuel is supplemented about 3-4% with ethanol that comes from distilling about half the U.S. corn crop. That is why your grocery bill is skyrocketing.)

*************************************

A Collaborator Countdown: The Four Horseman of the Oil Apocalypse

Find out who these four are and how knowing that will line your pockets with cash, while oil is set to shoot over $150 per barrel.

It’s all right here…

*************************************

But domestic volumes of oil output are depleting and declining inexorably. From the North Slope of Alaska to the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. output is just plain falling. There is very little good news, and even the good news is oft-times not so good.

New discoveries and new wells just cannot keep up with depletion of older oil fields. By 2025, U.S. daily oil output will be a fraction of its current level (probably down to about 2-3 million barrels per day), even with an aggressive program of drilling offshore and in Alaska — which is not happening, in any case.

Also by 2025, U.S. imports will almost certainly decline. The oil will not be available to buy and import from world markets. Not everyone agrees with this. In one fanciful projection from 2005, the U.S. DOE forecast that “Total U.S. gross petroleum imports are projected to increase in the reference case from 12.3 million barrels per day in 2003 to 20.2 million in 2025.” Maybe in somebody’s dreams, but my view is that this is one projection that will never come true.

Shares in leading German solar stocks rose substantially on expectations that other big players, including oil groups, are on the prowl in a market that grew to €6.6bn last year and is forecast to top €18bn by 2020.

Germany is by far the world’s biggest solar energy market thanks to its “feed-in” tariffs, which pay a government-guaranteed premium of up to €0.47 a kilowatt hour for power produced by photovoltaic panels. It is expected to continue to grow despite government plans to cut subsidies by 8% or 9% in 2009 and 2010.

“The richest investment opportunities can be found in the fast-emerging alternative energy sector,” says Mike Burnick in The Offshore A-Letter.

“That’s where oilman T. Boone Pickens is putting his money – his company Mesa Power just placed an order for US$2 billion in wind turbines. And there’s much more profit potential in other parts of the alternative energy sector too – especially alternative fuel.

“The market for ALL alternative energy sources grew 40% last year alone to US$77.3 billion and will explode into a US$250 billion industry within 10 years.

“Bio-fuel grew to a US$25.4 billion market last with more than 15 billion gallons of ethanol and biodiesel produced globally – more than double the output of just four years ago. The worldwide Bio-fuel industry will continue to enjoy explosive growth for years to come – expanding into a US$81 billion business within the next 10-years!”

“The days of meeting an unchecked demand for energy through monolithic carbon intensive power stations are coming to an end. Increasingly the emphasis will be on energy efficiency, renewables, cleaned up fossil fuel plant and micro generation,” the company said in a statement accompanying its full-year results, according to Britain’s The Guardian newspaper.

SSE, which currently gets 15% of its energy from nuclear suppliers, said it believed “one more tranche of nuclear power stations will be necessary, but that the deployment of such power stations should be minimised through the maximum exploitation of renewable energy sources.”

“The richest investment opportunities can be found in the fast-emerging alternative energy sector,” says Mike Burnick in The Offshore A-Letter.

“That’s where oilman T. Boone Pickens is putting his money – his company Mesa Power just placed an order for US$2 billion in wind turbines. And there’s much more profit potential in other parts of the alternative energy sector too – especially alternative fuel.

“The market for ALL alternative energy sources grew 40% last year alone to US$77.3 billion and will explode into a US$250 billion industry within 10 years.

“Bio-fuel grew to a US$25.4 billion market last with more than 15 billion gallons of ethanol and biodiesel produced globally – more than double the output of just four years ago. The worldwide Bio-fuel industry will continue to enjoy explosive growth for years to come – expanding into a US$81 billion business within the next 10-years!”

Floyd Brown in Investment U looks at another alternative energy source: the Fischer-Tropsch process, used to create synthetic fuels.

“The process works like this: Coal is broken into its components by subjecting it to high temperature and pressure, using steam and measured amounts of oxygen. This leads to the production of synthetic gas.

“In the United States, a small firm provides technology to produce ultra-clean synthetic fuels and chemicals. It licenses its proprietary derivative process from the Fischer-Tropsch method.

“It converts synthesis gas derived from coal, petroleum coke, biomass, natural gas, or municipal solid waste into liquid hydrocarbon products. This includes ultra clean diesel fuel, jet fuel, naphtha, specialty chemicals and other fuel products. It also manufactures anhydrous ammonia, UAN, nitric acid, carbon dioxide and granular and liquid urea.”

Read on here to find out Floyd’s cashing in on this conventional energy alternative.

Washington will be asked this week to answer allegations that subsidies amounting to 11p a litre on B99 [biodiesel with up to 1% petroleum added] exports from the US, plus “splash-and-dash” operations being conducted through the US, represent unfair competition.

The European Biodiesel Board lodged a formal complaint against the US with [the European commissioner] at the end of last month after a disastrous period for British, German and other biodiesel producers.

D1, one of the leading UK firms, announced in April that it would be closing its newly built refineries and laying off all its staff there because it could not compete against cheap US imports. Elliott Mannis, D1’s chief executive, said it was an “unbelievable situation” that Europe had sat on its hands so long and let B99 cause turmoil in a market that has opened up to huge new demand.

The case against the US will not be one-sided. Manning Feraci, of the US National Biodiesel Board, has said: “It is hypocritical for the EBB to cry foul while they benefit from a blatant trade barrier.”

Byron King in Energy and Oil is bullish on another alternative energy source: coal to liquid or CTL.

“The US will adopt CTL, because it has to do so,” says Byron. “There are few other large-scale industrial alternatives. Windmills, biofuels, conservation and every other energy-saving and energy-extending idea will help. But the world we live in is built to run on oil, and nothing else will cut it for some things when it comes to running a fast-transforming economy. So stand by for CTL.

“It is not a question of if the US will adopt CTL. It is a question of when. And looking ahead, every month is precious. As I said above, we are running out of time. So it will matter greatly how much will we as a nation fool around with our national obsession of navel-gazing over ancillary issues before we get around to making a decision to bend steel.”

“The biofuels debate is interesting from a number of angles,” says Merryn Somerset Webb in Money Week. “Firstly, it is not absolutely true to say that the commitment of land to the production of biofuels automatically reduces food production everywhere (although that hardly makes the European Union’s full-on encouragement of plant-derived fuel right).

“Supporters of biofuels tend to use the Brazilian experience as justification for the dash to plant-derived fuel alternatives, not that that country’s success should detract from the fact that there are a lot of other places where land which would otherwise have been used to grow food for human consumption has now been given over to the production of biofuel to feed machinery!

“The EU could, for example, call a halt to its pre-announced intention to derive 5.75% of petrol and diesel to be manufactured from plants, although we understand the EU’s difficulties given growing stresses in the oil market too.”

The oil will simply not be available in the volumes that the government, industry and people in general have come to expect. So the phenomenon of declining oil use will not be voluntary, graceful or cheap.

In fact, the decline in U.S. oil consumption will be quite painful for pretty much every American. Prices for fuel will rise, and you will wish that was the only problem. Spot shortages will turn into large scale “dry outs.”

You should anticipate that every level of government will do things to discourage using liquid fuel, from charging user fees and “congestion pricing” to higher taxes. Heck, the government might even appeal to your patriotism to drive less. And don’t be surprised to see rationing in one form or another, even with expensive fuel and costly fees and taxes.

But this is not a book review of James Howard Kunstler’s 2005 volume The Long Emergency, or his recently released (and exceedingly well-written) World Made by Hand. The point is that oil use will fall in the years to come, because world oil output is falling. You cannot use what is not there in the first place.

Setting the Stage for CTL

So this sets the stage to explain why Coal to Liquid (CTL) is about to simply take off in the U.S. The U.S. will adopt CTL, because it has to do so. There are few other large-scale industrial alternatives. Windmills, biofuels, conservation and every other energy-saving and energy-extending idea will help. But the world we live in is built to run on oil, and nothing else will cut it for some things when it comes to running a fast-transforming economy. So stand by for CTL.

According to a 2006 estimate by the National Coal Council, a robust CTL industry could produce about 2.6 million barrels per day of oil-equivalent fuel by 2025. This is about 12.5% of current U.S. daily demand. But it is tricky to draw comparisons over time frames of nearly 20 years. Certainly, a lot of things will change between now and 2025 in the realms of both demand and supply.

And a large-scale CTL program will dramatically increase the demand for coal. Can U.S. mines deliver? There are issues here, to be sure. The U.S. is supposed to have that mythical “250 years of coal reserves, at present rates of consumption.” But that estimate is 35 years old. And much U.S. coal is buried deep, in thin seams, and thus hard to mine. Plus, some 40% of U.S. coal resources are in Alaska — much of it north of the Arctic Circle. So even with coal, the U.S. needs to be wary of believing its own press releases.

Still, CTL can serve as a liquid fuel supplement for at least several decades. And CTL technology is pretty well developed, based on many decades of operational success by Sasol in South Africa. The Air Force believes that the CTL plants of the future can even be relatively “green,” based on evolving technology for removing pollutants from the coal and sequestering carbon dioxide. It will also be possible to reduce the volumes of coal in the blend by adding some types of plant-derived materials.

Thus, it is not a question of if the U.S. will adopt CTL. It is a question of when. And looking ahead, every month is precious. As I said above, we are running out of time. So it will matter greatly how much will we as a nation fool around with our national obsession of navel-gazing over ancillary issues before we get around to making a decision to bend steel.

One way or another, CTL is coming. And one way or another, we at Outstanding Investments are going to find a way to invest in the companies that will build it out.

Until we meet again…

Byron W. King

Note: Byron King is a frequent contributor to the free e-letter Whiskey & Gunpowder. To receive daily insights into energy, oil, commodities and other natural resources sign up here!

Source: The Coal to Liquid Debate Part II

I heard some of the “inside baseball” information on one major DOD program that will convert large amounts of U.S. coal into synthetic liquid fuel. This will be a government-industry partnership, with the U.S. Air Force as the lead agency.

In essence, the Air Force is offering a pilot site for a coal-to-liquid (CTL) project at a base in Montana. This will be the first of many such CTL facilities around the nation. The idea is that funding will come from the private sector, not the Air Force or any other government source.

The Air Force will sweeten the pot, however, by guaranteeing that it will purchase the fuel that comes out of the CTL plants. Eventually, much of the Air Force fleet will fly on a mixture of CTL fuel and traditional petroleum-based fuel. For the past two years or so, the Air Force has been qualifying its planes to fly on synthetic fuels. Just recently, a B-1B “Lancer” bomber went supersonic over New Mexico on a mix of synthetic fuel. So synthetic fuels work.

The Wagon Train Is Forming Up

Some of the synthetic fuels information has made it into various trade press publications. But the major media have pretty much ignored the synthetic fuels development. Even on Wall Street, this program is under the radar screens. I guess the people on Wall Street are too busy counting up their losses from subprime mortgages. But the wagon train is forming up on the trail to synthetic fuels. Things are going to start happening, and soon.

The idea is to jump-start a large U.S. military-industrial CTL program that will eventually serve the rest of the economy. The CTL projects will cost over $5 billion each, based on preliminary estimates. In other words, each CTL refinery will cost about as much as an aircraft carrier, and use about as much steel and equipment.

This ambitious CTL project will have major implications for the future of the coal-mining industry, as well as many companies in the engineering, construction and capital equipment sectors. It made me glad to have the likes of CONSOL Energy (CNX: NYSE) and Foundation Coal Holdings (FCL: NYSE) in the portfolio. I already have some other ideas for additional investment opportunities in this sector. So keep your Outstanding Investments subscription current.

Future Liquid Fuel Supplies — We’re Running out of Time

CTL will surely generate controversy. I cannot begin to describe the visceral opposition to CTL projects from the usual suspects. The NIMBYs, the environmental lobbyists the “global warming” activists and many others will all fight against CTL with tooth and nail. You will hear glib arguments about how “If we just do this or that” (windmills, biofuels, conservation, etc.) we can avoid the need to build any CTL plants. As a nation, we should “do this or that” in any event. Really, we need to do everything. But we will also have to build the CTL plants. The opposition to CTL reflects how deeply the “Just say no” approach is hard-wired into our modern culture.

The U.S. could get away with avoiding major capital investments in energy projects when the dollar was strong and oil was cheap. (How else did we wind up importing two-thirds of our daily oil?) If the U.S. needed oil, we just waved dollars and the tankers showed up at the piers. But no more.

It is crystal clear that the U.S. no longer has long-term assured access to liquid fuels. I hope you got the memo. This reality is rapidly transforming into a supreme matter of national security. A U.S. CTL industry cannot come about too fast, in my view. The nation is not “running out of oil,” technically speaking. But not enough oil can cause just as much havoc as running out. And the national “adult supervision” sure knows that the U.S. is running out of time. Let’s look at the present and forecast the future.

Oil Output and Supply

First, let’s discuss the U.S. oil supply going forward. The U.S. presently consumes about 21 million barrels of oil per day. This is a mix of domestic output (much coming in small quantities from several hundred thousand old stripper wells) and imports.

According to the most recent figures from the U.S. DOE, in January 2008, U.S. crude oil output was just over 5 million barrels per day, plus additional natural gas liquids. The balance of oil consumption comes from imports. (Also, the U.S. supply of transportation fuel is supplemented about 3-4% with ethanol that comes from distilling about half the U.S. corn crop. That is why your grocery bill is skyrocketing.)

But domestic volumes of oil output are depleting and declining inexorably. From the North Slope of Alaska to the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. output is just plain falling. There is very little good news, and even the good news is oft-times not so good.

New discoveries and new wells just cannot keep up with depletion of older oil fields. By 2025, U.S. daily oil output will be a fraction of its current level (probably down to about 2-3 million barrels per day), even with an aggressive program of drilling offshore and in Alaska — which is not happening, in any case.

Also by 2025, U.S. imports will almost certainly decline. The oil will not be available to buy and import from world markets. Not everyone agrees with this. In one fanciful projection from 2005, the U.S. DOE forecast that “Total U.S. gross petroleum imports are projected to increase in the reference case from 12.3 million barrels per day in 2003 to 20.2 million in 2025.” Maybe in somebody’s dreams, but my view is that this is one projection that will never come true.

Really, by 2025, the rest of the oil-producing world will simply lack the product to export. This will be due to reasons of depletion on a global scale, and fast-growing internal demand in oil-producing nations. Gasoline consumption in places as diverse as Russia, Iran, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia is just soaring, so there is less net oil available for export.

And oil output everywhere is flat or declining. (Just last month, Russia announced a plateau in oil output.) And closer to home, Mexico’s Cantarell field is simply crashing at an annual depletion rate of 8% or more.

So what will happen in 2025? Will the U.S. pump its own oil? No, it’s not there. Will the U.S. continue to import large volumes? No, it won’t be available. The bottom line is that conventional oil sources for the U.S. — domestic output and imports — are simply drying up.

Be on the lookout for Part II tomorrow!

Until we meet again,

Byron King

Note: Byron King is a frequent contributor to the free e-letter Whiskey & Gunpowder. To receive daily insights into energy, oil, commodities and other natural resources sign up here!

Source: The Coal To Liquid Debate Part I