Energy & Commodities

China’s Nuclear Power Gamble Is Mind-Boggling

GraphEngine.ashxWhat we know is Uranium mines only supply 85% of current Utility requirements. The price has dropped 70% since ’07 . Nuclear energy generates no CO2. Whether you agree with Global Warming/Climate Change or not, it is just a huge factor in local, regional, national & international politics/spending/taxation. Rob, Ed for Moneytalks.net

China’s Nuclear Power Gamble Is Mind-Boggling

The numbers that define China’s progress over the last 50 years are staggering. Over 300 million people lifted out of poverty. Over 160 cities with more than 1 million inhabitants. Over 630 million Internet users.. And now, following the recent climate change deal with U.S., China has a massive price tag of $2 trillion to implement climate policy changes. In order to cap carbon emissions and generate 20% of the country’s electricity from renewables by 2030, Bloomberg estimates this would require 1,000 nuclear reactors, 500,000 wind turbines or 50,000 solar farms. “The pledge would require China to produce either 67 times more nuclear energy than the country is forecast to have at the end of 2014, 30 times more solar or nine times more wind power. That almost equals the non-fossil fuel energy of the entire U.S. generating capacity today,” wrote Bloomberg.

With China already being the global number one in wind and solar energy, financing more projects for these in

2013 than all of Europe combined, it would seem logical for it to turn to these two sources for that massive expansion. However, much chatter from Communist officials is putting the attention squarely on nuclear. In early November, Guo Chengzhan, the deputy director of the National Nuclear Safety Administration, stated that “nuclear power is China’s only scalable replacement energy and is a vital choice in China’s energy strategy”, while Tsinghua University expert Teng Fei told Reuters that without nuclear, China’s peak carbon target could “be delayed by as long as a decade.”

 

Nuclear power is also very likely to be firmly etched into China’s 13th Five-Year Plan (2016-2020) amid a massive drive toward clean energy. Such a commitment is the highest that the Communist Party’s Politburo can make, and while not all Five-Year Plan pledges are met, the country’s track record in wind and solar allow for confidence that it will achieve its nuclear targets as well. One distinct advantage is that such an expansion of nuclear reactors would be embraced at the local level, a key factor in getting central policies to be effective. After all, nuclear reactors would provide several of the important elements party bosses like to see: a visible, marquee infrastructure project for their area, large-scale job creation through construction and auxiliary services, and a potential reduction in long-term pollution which would help to quell unrest.

Another advantage will come from the efforts China is making to have nuclear technology be developed inside the country. In recent years, Westinghouse and Areva have both exported their sophisticated nuclear reactor technology to China, but three domestic nuclear firms are working on adapting that technology to future domestic needs. The South China Morning Post reports that China General Nuclear and China National Nuclear are collaborating on the Hualong 1 reactor model, based on Areva’s technology, while State Nuclear Power has issued a model named CAP1400, inspired by Westinghouse ideas. While these may eventually lead to sophisticated reactors, current third-generation Chinese reactors being built from Western technology in Guangdong and Zhejiang have suffered major delays.

Related: China Strengthening Claim To South China Sea Oil And Gas

But China is catching up. With Areva’s shares crashing after major financial difficulties threatened to stop it from meeting its 2015 and 2016 obligations, China is moving into the gap. The country has already inked a $6.5 billion deal to build nuclear reactors in Pakistan. In the UK, China has invested in the planned Hinkley Point nuclear plant. Since June, Chinese companies will have the right to control Chinese-designed nuclear power stations in the UK.

Time will tell to what extent China relies on nuclear to successfully meet its ambitious 2030 plans, or whether it can even do so. The next five years will be telling as China aims to bring six new nuclear plants online every year from 2015 to 2020. If it can do so while navigating numerous obstacles from a lack of domestic expertise to struggling grid capacity, then there is little doubt that nuclear will follow wind and solar as the country’s latest energy success.

By Chris Dalby of OilPrice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

 

 

 

Oil Plunges as Opec to Keep 30m Barrel Output Target

The Vienna meeting is the most crucial since the financial crisis, with the price of oil having slumped by more than 30 per cent since mid-June.

….continue reading HERE

Screen Shot 2014-11-27 at 9.06.14 AM

So Bad It’s Good: Surviving 2014

Nine Stock Picks & Perspective From 9 Different Experts 

Screen Shot 2014-11-25 at 9.31.39 PMWhile some contrarian investors thought the 2014 natural resource market was so bad it was good—their are others all too happy to see this this volatile year in the rearview mirror. 

Streewise Reports: What is the 2014 development for which you are most grateful?

Marin Katusa: I am grateful for the current correction in the resources area. It is what we’ve been waiting for. We have been saying to stay in cash for a while, be very patient, we’re going to have a correction. If you are a true contrarian investor, you have to buy when there is blood on the streets. I can assure you that in Vancouver, the junior resource hub of the world, there is blood on the streets. It’s going to probably take longer than most people want for the market to turn around. That’s irrelevant to me; I don’t take a quarterly or a monthly perspective. I look at the longer-term perspective. I’m thankful for the correction because it’s providing me opportunities to get into some of the best companies at prices that two years ago would seem unimaginable. 

Frank Holmes: I am thankful for the royalty model and the MLP model, because with these you have higher margins along with dividend income. In particular, I was happiest with names such as Virginia Mines Inc. (VGQ:TSX) most recently, along with Franco-Nevada Corp. (FNV:TSX; FNV:NYSE)Royal Gold Inc. (RGLD:NASDAQ; RGL:TSX) and Silver Wheaton Corp. (SLW:TSX; SLW:NYSE).

John Kaiser: The collapse of valuations in the resource sector has widespread negative repercussions, but a positive outcome. What I am thankful for is that we are no longer in an environment where everything is overvalued because of positive momentum in both the market and the key commodity cycle and in gold bug narratives. Instead, now it is possible to find good value adjusted for fundamental and external risks. 2014 killed the last greater fool. Going forward, investors in the resource sector will only look smart for the right reasons.

David Morgan: As I say at the end of The Morgan Report every month, “health above wealth, and wisdom above knowledge.” As always, I am grateful to be alive and surrounded by wonderful people. 

Rick Rule: I am thankful for the young individuals I work with at Sprott who are really developing and making an impact at the company. Those are the people who will take the sector to the next level. 

Chris Berry: I definitely think we’ve bottomed in the metals. This doesn’t mean that certain metals like iron ore can’t fall further, but generally, metals prices such as copper or lithium seem to have stabilized. The real questions now are how long do we stay at these depressed levels and what will be the catalyst for the next leg up in the cycle? It may be 2016–2017 before we know the answers.

Brent Cook: I am thankful that my daughters are doing well and off the dole, and for some great beach volleyball in Mexico as I celebrated my 60th birthday.

Investment wise, I am also thankful that two of the companies in the Exploration Insightsportfolio—Papillon Resources Inc. (PIR:ASX; PAPQF:GREYS) and Virginia Mines Inc. were bought out at premiums. Both had high quality, legitimate economic deposits that can make money at any foreseeable gold price. Companies like those are few and far between.

I am also grateful that my thesis of declining economic discoveries leading to increasing demand for these very few developable deposits is playing out. It will take time, however. What I don’t think we have seen yet is capitulation. When Rick Rule capitulates, then we have complete capitulation and the market can start to turn.

Kal Kotecha: I am grateful that gold is only down marginally by my calculation. It is actually the U.S. dollar that is rising and making gold look weak. 

Chen Lin: I am grateful that I saw the correction of commodities coming during the summer and was able to raise a lot of cash in early September. Otherwise my portfolio would have suffered huge damage.

SWR: What was the biggest turkey of 2014, what are you glad is behind us as we move into 2015?

Rick Rule: I was the biggest turkey. I was really expecting a surge in the retail resource marketplace. I was expecting capitulation. I have been hanging in there and was really surprised at the degree of volatility. Instead of capitulation, we took another leg down. That makes me a turkey. Now we have to see if I will be right in 2015. 

John Kaiser: The biggest turkey was the updated feasibility study Goldcorp Inc. (G:TSX; GG:NYSE) published in late March for its Eleonore gold mine in Quebec. Eleonore was the greatest Canadian gold exploration discovery made by a resource junior (Virginia Gold Mines) during the past decade. When Goldcorp bought Virginia in March 2006, gold was at about $550 per ounce ($550/oz), less than half where it is today. After the pre-resource estimate in 2006 for $750 million ($750M), the company outlined 3.8M Proven and Probable ounces and another 4M Inferred ounces at a somewhat higher grade, nearly doubling the projected 9 year mine-life. The 7,500 ton per day underground mine will average 400,000 oz annually, but the feasibility study indicates that at a 5% discount rate using $$1,300/oz gold, the after-tax net present value is negative $172M and the internal rate of return is 3.15%, thanks largely to a capital cost of $1.85 billion.

Eleonore is a symbolic turkey for the exploration sector because it has raised the bar for what counts as an exploration success at $1,200/oz gold to an impossibly high level. If a junior discovers a new deposit in a remote location that looks like Eleonore tomorrow, the market would have to dismiss it as economically insignificant. Eleonore has already been built, so it would benefit from higher gold price and the doubling of mine life when the resource is upgraded to a reserve, but it would not be built today. 

Frank Holmes: In 2014 the “turkey country” was Colombia, with Ecuador appearing to be the new dove. The biggest turkey has been Gran Colombia Gold Corp. (GCM:TSX)(GCM:TSX), for a number of reasons. In Colombia, poor government policies hurt mining companies. This risk of socialism, paired and with the price of gold and weak management that was unable to focus on mine development, really hurt the company. 

Chris Berry: The biggest turkey was tin. Based on ore export bans in countries like Indonesia and threats to do the same in the Philippines, I expected the tin price to end the year substantially higher. This did not happen, even though we did see higher prices for similar metals like nickel and aluminum. 

Brent Cook: The biggest turkey is that a sizable portion of humanity has not mentally advanced much past the Stone Age, with the exception of methods of killing each other. The long list of atrocities committed in the Ukraine, Palestine, Israel, Sudan, Congo, etc. by the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram and others, document that there is nothing kind about mankind. 

David Morgan: Colossus Minerals Inc. (CSI:TSX; COLUF:OTCQX) was a big disappointment. I still think it had one of the best assets in the world, but it was a complete disaster. There were structural issues in the underground mine and management, for whatever reason, wasn’t forthright about what was happening. That is a reminder to only invest money you can afford to lose. 

Kal Kotecha: The biggest turkey of 2014 was coal. In addition to government pressure, the impact of Australia flooding the market with cheap supply and China’s demand slowing down has taken a toll. However, with a new Republican majority in place in Washington D.C., prospects may improve for coal in 2015. 

Chen Lin: Mart Resources Inc. (MMT:TSX.V) is my biggest turkey of 2014. It was supposed to start its new pipeline in the first half, then the beginning of second half of the year. Now we are in November and it is still waiting for the final paper work. Shares dropped to below CA$1, unthinkable a year ago. Fortunately, the dividends I received already covered my original costs. But it still hurt a lot. I hope they will get the final signature soon and let the oil flow. 

ChrisBerry revChris Berry, with a lifelong interest in geopolitics and the financial issues that emerge from these relationships, founded House Mountain Partners in 2010. The firm focuses on the evolving geopolitical relationship between emerging and developed economies, the commodity space and junior mining and resource stocks positioned to benefit from this phenomenon. Berry holds a Master of Business Administration in finance with an international focus from Fordham University, and a Bachelor of Arts in international studies from the Virginia Military Institute.

FrankHolmes revFrank Holmes is CEO and chief investment officer at U.S. Global Investors Inc., which manages a diversified family of mutual funds and hedge funds specializing in natural resources, emerging markets and gold and precious metals. Holmes purchased a controlling interest in U.S. Global Investors in 1989 and became the firm’s chief investment officer in 1999. Under his guidance, the company’s funds have received numerous awards and honors including more than two dozen Lipper Fund Awards and certificates. In 2006, Holmes was selected mining fund manager of the year by the Mining Journal. He is also the co-author of “The Goldwatcher: Demystifying Gold Investing.” He is a member of the President’s Circle and on the investment committee of the International Crisis Group, which works to resolve global conflict, and is an adviser to the William J. Clinton Foundation on sustainable development in nations with resource-based economies. Holmes is a much sought-after keynote speaker at national and international investment conferences. He is also a regular commentator on the financial television networks CNBC, Bloomberg and Fox Business, and has been profiled by Fortune, Barron’s, The Financial Times and other publications.

brentcook revBrent Cook brings more than 30 years of experience to his role as a geologist, consultant and investment adviser. His knowledge spans all areas of the mining business, from the conceptual stage through detailed technical and financial modeling related to mine development and production. Cook’s weekly Exploration Insights newsletter focuses on early discovery, high-reward opportunities, primarily among junior mining and exploration companies.

 

MarinKatusa revWith a background in mathematics, Marin Katusa left teaching post-secondary mathematics to pursue portfolio management within the resource sector. His hedge fund’s five-year track record has beat the peer TSX-V index by over 600%. He is regularly interviewed on national and local television channels in North America, such as the Business News Network (BNN) and many other radio and newspaper outlets for his opinions and insights regarding the resource sector. Katusa is a director of Canada’s third largest copper producer, Copper Mountain Mining Corp. Katusa is the chief investment strategist for the energy division of Casey Research. A regular part of his due diligence process for Casey Research includes property tours, which has resulted in him visiting hundreds of mining and energy producing and exploration projects all around the world. You can learn more about his book, “The Colder War” here.

JohnKaiser revJohn Kaiser, a mining analyst with 25-plus years of experience, produces Kaiser Research Online. After graduating from the University of British Columbia in 1982, he joined Continental Carlisle Douglas as a research assistant. Six years later, he moved to Pacific International Securities as research director, and also became a registered investment adviser. He moved to the U.S. with his family in 1994.

 

 

kalkotechaheadshotKal Kotecha is the editor and founder of the Junior Gold Report, a publication about small-cap mining stocks. He was the editor and creator of The Moly/Gold Report, which focuses on critical analyses and open journalism of companies profiting from the precious and base metals sector. The scope of his current activities include worldwide onsite analyses and reporting of developing companies. Kotecha has previously held leadership positions with many junior mining companies. Kotecha completed his Master of Business Administration in finance in 2007 and is working on his Ph.D. in business marketing. He also teaches economics at the University of Waterloo.

chenlinrev2Chen Lin writes the popular stock newsletter What Is Chen Buying? What Is Chen Selling?, published and distributed by Taylor Hard Money Advisors, Inc. While a doctoral candidate in aeronautical engineering at Princeton, Chen found his investment strategies were so profitable that he put his Ph.D. on the back burner. He employs a value-oriented approach and often demonstrates excellent market timing due to his exceptional technical analysis.

 

morgan4 revDavid Morgan (www.Silver-Investor.com) is a widely recognized analyst in the precious metals industry; he consults for hedge funds, high net-worth investors, mining companies, depositories and bullion dealers. He is the publisher of The Morgan Report on precious metals, the author of “Get the Skinny on Silver Investing” and a featured speaker at investment conferences in North America, Europe and Asia.

 

 

RickRule headshot

Rick Rule, CEO of Sprott US Holdings Inc., began his career in the securities business in 1974. He is a leading American retail broker specializing in mining, energy, water utilities, forest products and agriculture. His company has built a national reputation on taking advantage of global opportunities in the oil and gas, mining, alternative energy, agriculture, forestry and water industries. Rule writes a free, thrice-weekly e-letter, Sprott’s Thoughts.

Want to read more articles like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published.

Related Articles

 

 

DISCLOSURE:
1) JT Long conducted this interview for Streetwise Reports LLC, publisher of The Gold Report, The Energy Report, The Life Sciences Report and The Mining Report, and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an employee. She owns, or her family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. 
2) Brent Cook: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in my comments: Virginia Mines Inc. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in my comments: None. The following companies mentioned in my comments have a financial relationship with my company: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I determined and had final say over which companies would be included in the interview based on my research, understanding of the sector and interview theme. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.
Frank Holmes: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in my comments: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in my comments: None. The following companies mentioned in my comments are held in U.S. Global Investors funds: Franco-Nevada Corp., Royal Gold Inc., Silver Wheaton Corp., Virginia Mines Inc. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I determined and had final say over which companies would be included in the interview based on my research, understanding of the sector and interview theme. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview. 
John Kaiser: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in my comments: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in my comments: None. The following companies mentioned in my comments have a financial relationship with my company: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I determined and had final say over which companies would be included in the interview based on my research, understanding of the sector and interview theme. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.
Chen Lin: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: Mart Resources Inc. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. The following companies mentioned in this interview have a financial relationship with my company: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I determined and had final say over which companies would be included in the interview based on my research, understanding of the sector and interview theme. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.
David Morgan: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in my comments: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in my comments: None. The following companies mentioned in my comments have a financial relationship with my company: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I determined and had final say over which companies would be included in the interview based on my research, understanding of the sector and interview theme. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview. 
3) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Mart Resources Inc., Pan Orient Energy Corp., Gran Colombia Gold Corp., Virginia Mines Inc. and Silver Wheaton Corp. Franco-Nevada Corp. and Goldcorp Inc. are not affiliated with Streetwise Reports. The companies mentioned in this interview were not involved in any aspect of the interview preparation or post-interview editing so the expert could speak independently about the sector. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services. 
4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent. 
5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer.
6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise during the up-to-four-week interval from the time of the interview until after it publishes.

 

Oil Trading Alert: Buy

Where Is the Price of Crude Oil Going?

Trading position (short-term; our opinion): Long positions with a stop-loss at $72.78 are justified from the risk/reward perspective.

On Friday, crude oil gained 0.47% as Thursday’s solid U.S. data and talks that OPEC may consider trimming production continued to support the commodity. As a result, light crude left the recent consolidation and closed the day above $76. Will we see a rally to $80 in the coming days?

On Friday, crude oil climbed to an intraday high of $77.83 as the combination of solid U.S. data continued to support the commodity. How did this increase affected the very short-term picture of crude oil? (charts courtesy of http://stockcharts.com).

35914 a

Larger Image

From the medium-term perspective, we see that the situation hasn’t changed much as crude oil is still trading above the key support created by the 50% Fibonacci retracement based on the entire 2009-2011 rally.

What can we infer from the very short-term picture?

35914 b

Larger Image

In our previous Oil Trading Alert, we wrote the following:

(…) The first thing that catches the eye on the daily chart is an invalidation of the breakdown below the previously-broken lower border of the declining trend channel. Although we saw a similar price action in mid-Nov, this time oil bulls managed to push the commodity not only well above this support line, but also above the upper border of the consolidation (marked with red). These are strong bullish signals, which suggest further improvement in the coming days.

Looking at the above chart, we see that oil bulls pushed the commodity higher as we expected. As a result, crude oil bounced off the upper line of the consolidation and approached the Nov 12 high. Although light crude gave up some gains, it still remains above the consolidation range, which means that as long as there is no invalidation of the breakout further improvement is likely. How high could light crude go? We think that the best answer to this question will be our last commentary:

(…) Taking into account the breakout from consolidation, crude oil will likely climb to around $79.50, where the size of the upswing will correspond to the height of the formation. At this point, it’s worth noting that this target is in a solid resistance area where the upper line of the declining trend channel, the previous lows and the barrier of $80 are. Therefore, we think that further rally will be more likely, if we see a breakout above this zone. In this case, the next upside target for oil bulls would be around $81.68, where the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement based on the Sep 30-Nov 14 decline is. (…) the CCI and Stochastic Oscillator generated buy signals, supporting the bullish case.

Summing up, we are convinced that keeping long positions (which are already profitable) is still justified from the risk/reward perspective as crude oil broke (and closed the day) above the upper line of the consolidation and buy signals generated by the CCI and Stochastic Oscillator remain in place, supporting further improvement.

Very short-term outlook: bullish
Short-term outlook: mixed with bullish bias
MT outlook: mixed
LT outlook: bullish

Trading position (short-term; our opinion): Long positions with a stop-loss at $72.78 are justified from the risk/reward perspective.

Winter is Coming—How Investors Can Win in the ‘Colder War’

Are you ready for the next Cold War? Casey Research energy strategist Marin Katusa cautions that Russia and China have forged an alliance with the goal of world supremacy through control of the energy market and Vladimir Putin is winning. Katusa recently penned the book “The Colder War,” and in this interview with The Energy Report, he discusses why investors need to pick companies wisely to profit in this turbulent energy landscape.

The Energy ReportYour book, “The Colder War,” is based on the idea that world domination will come through control of the energy economy, and that Russia is winning the fight. How is Russia using the petrodollar to achieve energy supremacy?

imagesMarin Katusa: Under the leadership of President Vladimir Putin, Russia has reestablished itself as the alternative to the American superpower. Putin has aligned himself with nations like China to work in concert against U.S. interests globally. Furthermore, a new bank formed by the BRICS countries—Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa—will attempt to assert itself as an alternative to the International Monetary Fund. 

The Colder War will be a long battle, just like the first Cold War, but in the Colder War, judgment day of the petrodollar will be the critical battle. One must understand global politics and the Colder War to be a successful investor in the energy sector.

TER: What is China’s role in this struggle? 

MK: By the end of 2014, China will become the largest net importer of oil in the world. It signed a natural gas deal worth more than $400 billion, but importantly, the business was transacted in rubles and yuan, as opposed to U.S. dollars. I can assure you that China won’t be trading in U.S. dollars moving forward. And it has been making numerous energy deals with nations that oppose the U.S., including Iran. South Africa, Brazil and other likeminded nations are following Russia and China. But it is under Putin’s leadership that emerging markets are uniting to fight the interests of the U.S. globally.

TER: What is Africa’s role?

MK: Western companies are shying away from the political instability in northern Africa. At $75/barrel ($75/bbl) for oil, and with current metal prices, it’s difficult to develop energy and metal resources in Africa. Northern Africa has great potential, but it’s lacking the infrastructure that Europe, Asia and North America have. The Chinese and Russians have significantly more investments in Africa than Western firms. The Chinese plan in 50-year cycles, whereas North American companies need to plan in quarterly cycles for their shareholders. It’s a very different mindset. Africa will play a key role in a few decades, but currently isn’t a key player globally. 

TER: What about Latin America?

MK: Latin America has great potential for resources, both energy and metal. But at current oil prices, there is much cheaper oil to be had in the Middle East and Russia. Mexico in 2015, when the nation opens up Bid Round 1 to foreign companies, will be very exciting for both shale oil and heavy oil onshore, and for the bigger companies offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. Many savvy energy companies and investors are already eyeing the potential. Energy investors should look at what successful resource titans like Ian Telfer are doing with Renaissance Oil Corp. (ROE.VN:TSX.V) to gain exposure to the big potential of shale oil in Mexico.

TER: Discuss the relationship between China and Russia. How are these countries approaching world domination this time around? Is this actually a partnership?

MK: Russia and China don’t look at it as world domination—they look at it as advancing their national interests, which they are working together to achieve. That’s no different than what America’s been doing. The difference between the Colder War and the Cold War is that China and the emerging markets did not play such a significant role the first time around—and the fact that judgment day of the petrodollar will determine who wins the Colder War.

Screen Shot 2014-11-24 at 7.19.46 AMIn the Colder War, both China and the emerging markets have aligned themselves with Russia, not the U.S. This is evident not just from an energy standpoint, but from a geopolitical standpoint as well. Putin is the face of the opposition to the U.S. globally; the world took notice in 2013, when he stood up to the U.S. on the Syria issue.

Time and time again, China has voted with Russia in the United Nations: Syria, Ukraine, Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The sanctions that the West has placed on Russia are irrelevant to China and the OPEC nations. In fact, the sanctions are actually bringing China and Russia closer together, and it’s going to come back to haunt Europe.

TER: How will this partnership impact Europe?

MK: The reality is that Western Europe is very dependent on Russian energy sources. Germany, the largest consumer of energy in Europe, makes up about 25% of Gazprom’s (OGZD:LSE; GAZ:FSE; GAZP:MCX; GAZP:RTS; OGZPY:OTC) revenue. Gazprom is one of the world’s largest gas producers and Russia’s largest gas company.

One BASF SE (BAS:FSE; BASFY:OTC) petrochemical plant in Germany consumes more electricity in one year than the whole country of Norway. That’s an example of how much energy Germany consumes compared to other European nations. Germany needs Russian sources of energy. Germany’s green energy program is not cheap; it’s resulted in three consecutive years of 25% price increases. It requires government subsidies. However, Germany has great geological potential, and it will benefit from applying proven modern technology to past-producing oil and natural gas fields.

For example, PRD Energy Inc. (PRD:TSX.V) has a large land position and a very high-quality, past-producing field. It has great joint ventures with companies like Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM:NYSE). It comes down to this: Will the company be able to execute on its plan? Will the company be able to drill on budget, and keep costs down, as the risk isn’t whether oil is there or not, the risk is in management not keeping costs down on the drill program.

Vermilion Energy Corp. (VET:TSX) is another example of a company I like a lot. We made great profits on Vermilion when we sold it at the end of Q2/14 because we didn’t like the way the energy markets were looking. I’d like to buy back into a company like Vermilion. If I were Vermilion, I would be looking at PRD as a buyout target. I wouldn’t be surprised if, within 36 months, Vermilion buys out PRD.

TER: That sounds like a long-term play. Is it going to take a long time to crack the shales in German the way we have in the U.S.?

MK: Three factors are needed to make a shale play work, whether it’s in North America, South America or Europe. First, you’ve got to have the right rocks. Not all shale formations are the same. Second, you need to have existing infrastructure. That’s what a lot of investors overlook in the shale game. You can have a great shale formation, but if it’s in the middle of nowhere, how are you going to get the oil out, and then how do you get that oil to where it’s refined? Third, you need the right price.

Screen Shot 2014-11-24 at 7.19.57 AMExxon’s highest oil netbacks are actually in Germany. The infrastructure in Germany is amazing, something most in the energy sector are oblivious to. Less than 50 miles away from PRD’s first well is one of the largest refineries in Europe. PRD has the right oil price, good infrastructure and past-producing oil fields that have never seen modern technology. The first successful horizontal oil well in the history of Germany was drilled at the end of 2013.

This is the very early stages of what I call the European Energy Renaissance. It’s going to take many, many years to fully develop, just as it has in North America. Remember, even in North America, changes over the last seven years have been significant. I expect similar progress in certain areas in Europe, as well.

TER: If it’s going to take a long time for Europe to develop its own energy, should we be looking at investing in Gazprom in the mean time?

MK: That depends on your risk tolerance. Do I, or do funds that I manage, own any Russian oil companies? No. That said, from a fundamental analysis perspective, using Warren Buffett’s rules, if you believe the numbers in Gazprom’s financials, it’s very cheap. 

However, as I stated in my newsletter, it’s a very un-American investment. You invest in Russian oil companies if you want to expose yourself to those types of risks. There are many easier ways to profit at $75/bbl oil and in the Colder War than exposing yourself to Russian oil and natural gas companies, and that is the basis of my book. I first lay out the important history, then discuss the present situation of the energy matrix, and then, most importantly, discuss the foundation of how to profit from the Colder War.

TER: Will American oil independence due to fracking shelter the U.S. from this Russian threat?

MK: Russia is the world’s No. 1 oil producer. Saudi Arabia is No. 2. Now, take a look at the U.S. numbers. Is the U.S. shale immune to the Colder War? Definitely not.

Not all shale formations are created equal. Certain areas in the Eagle Ford, Bakken and Marcellus are very economic at sub-$75/bbl oil. Those are the areas investors should look at if they want to invest in the U.S. shale sector. Some low-cost producers in those formations can be profitable at $65/bbl oil, and at $2.50 per 1,000 cubic feet natural gas, but there are other formations that will suffer with oil at $75/bbl. 

Remember, the Colder War is very complex, and it’s not just about Russia. It’s about how all countries are interconnected in the Colder War. And Putin is the face of the counterforce to American supremacy.

America reaching oil independence is a very hypothetical, fantasy-based question. The U.S. still imports more than 6 million barrels of oil a day (6 MMbbl/d). The reality is that the U.S. is not oil independent; it relies on imports. Just look at Saudi Arabia’s price cutting measures right now—it is causing chaos in the North American oil patches.

TER: So, we can’t be isolationist.

MK: Definitely not.

TER: You talked about liking some of the shales more than others. What about some of the companies that could do well in the U.S.?

MK: We’ve tracked every single producer in North America for years now, and for months we have stated that a correction in the oil patch is coming. So be very careful. 

In July, we published “The Difference between U.S. Producers and the Canadian Producers.” We go into great detail about which investments to consider if you’re into dividends, and which companies will benefit more at $75/bbl oil versus $100/bbl oil. It’s very company-specific. Just because a company says it’s a shale oil producer does not mean that it’s the same as another producer in the heart of the Marcellus, Eagle Ford or Bakken.

TER: Will Canadian or U.S. companies perform better at $75/bbl oil?

MK: It depends on what you’re looking for, but Canadian companies have much more fiscal discipline. They pay a much better yield than American companies. In general, American companies have higher debt, and they’re more tilted for growth than paying out their shareholders. If you’re looking for dividends, specific Canadian producers are better. But remember, it’s all company-specific, so investors should do their homework, or make sure whoever they are listening to knows the math on all the producers.

TER: You have talked about uranium as a political tool. How is that tool being used, and by whom?

MK: Unfortunately for the Americans, President Barack Obama has cannibalized the domestic uranium sector with the U.S. Department of Energy’s sales of uranium. In addition, as a result of Fukushima, we are currently in an underfeeding market. Investors need to make very specific choices when picking companies in the uranium space. Until the underfeeding changes to overfeeding, the price of uranium will not change. The key is to be exposed to a company positioned to benefit from the maximum upside when the price of uranium changes. If a company has hedged production, the price pop is irrelevant. The sad part is that in-situ recovery rates are very similar to how gas well rates decline. You’ve got to be very careful about companies you’re investing in.

Screen Shot 2014-11-24 at 7.20.09 AMI’ve been researching this market for more than a decade, and we have very few uranium recommendations in our newsletter, but we’ve had incredible success with the companies we do recommend. Our most recent recommendation made more than 25%. We bought and sold it in less than three weeks. The recommendation before that—six months earlier—made more than 50% in less than 50 days. This is a market where most resources investors are down, on average, more than 20% year-to-date.

You don’t want to be exposed to companies that do not have infrastructure, that have high debt or that are hedged in the near term. Our subscribers have done very well with Uranium Energy Corp. (UEC:NYSE.MKT) because it’s a low-cost, in-situ recovery producer in the U.S. It’s fully permitted, with capacity of up to 2 million pounds uranium at its Hobson plant. Best of all, the company is completely unhedged. It will have the maximum upside of any U.S. producer when the price of uranium turns, which it will. Uranium Energy also has one of the best management teams in the uranium sector. When you look at the net asset value of the company, and then compare it to the market price, the company is incredibly cheap.

Uranium Energy hosted a site visit, where more than 40 Casey subscribers and large-fund managers toured the producing Hobson processing facility, truly a world-class operation. It is impressive what the company has created.

TER: What should investors do to protect themselves during the Colder War?

MK: I would start with reading the book, “The Colder War.” I’m the only person in the world talking about this, and I have been for years. The Western media is mostly ignorant to the reality of what’s going on. It is all fact-based. I can guarantee that the book will change the outlook of most energy investors. Former congressman Dr. Ron Paul, Bill BonnerDoug CaseyGrant Williams and Ian Telfer all enjoyed the book, and more importantly, the data and analysis absolutely shocked them. They believe it’s a must read. If guys like Ron Paul take notice, investors should pay attention to that.

TER: What advice do you have for investors are afraid of the resource market right now?

MK: Educate yourself. Everyone talks about buying low and selling high, but it’s easy to buy when it’s high because it feels good. Fortune favors the bold. You make money by being a contrarian in the resource sector, and when things look awful. Take the uranium market right now. It’s the most unloved sector in the world, but we’ve been making consistent, strong profits. It is a perfect example. If you know how to pick right and sit tight, you’re going to do very well. Oil is coming to the point where it’s becoming unloved, which is exactly when you want to expose yourself to a sector. 

TER: Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us today, Marin.

MK: My pleasure.

With a background in mathematics, Marin Katusa left teaching post-secondary mathematics to pursue portfolio management within the resource sector. His hedge fund’s five-year track record has beat the peer TSX-V index by over 600%. He is regularly interviewed on national and local television channels in North America, such as the Business News Network (BNN) and many other radio and newspaper outlets for his opinions and insights regarding the resource sector. Katusa is a director of Canada’s third largest copper producer, Copper Mountain Mining Corp. (CUM.TO). Katusa is the chief investment strategist for the energy division of Casey Research. A regular part of his due diligence process for Casey Research includes property tours, which has resulted in him visiting hundreds of mining and energy producing and exploration projects all around the world. You can learn more about his book, “The Colder War” here

Want to read more Energy Report interviews like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published. To see a list of recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Streetwise Interviews page.

Related Articles

 

Check out the entire  Streetwise Reports Essential Investor Bookshelf.

 

 

DISCLOSURE: 
1) JT Long conducted this interview for Streetwise Reports LLC, publisher of The Gold Report, The Energy Report, The Life Sciences Report and The Mining Report, and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an employee. She owns, her family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. 
2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: None. The companies mentioned in this interview were not involved in any aspect of the interview preparation or post-interview editing so the expert could speak independently about the sector. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.
3) Marin Katusa: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: PRD Energy Inc., Renaissance Oil Corp. and Uranium Energy Corp. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I determined and had final say over which companies would be included in the interview based on my research, understanding of the sector and interview theme. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview. 
4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent. 
5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer.
6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise during the up-to-four-week interval from the time of the interview until after it publishes.