Energy & Commodities

Energy Storage – Why it Dooms Solar & Wind

Ultimately math will rule the success of any new technology. In these 3 articles I have assembled about Energy storage, the key to success in intermittent sources like wind and solar, it becomes pretty apparent that we have the equivalent of an Everest to climb to gain the science necessary to make either of these energy sources profitable enough to justify the money required to set them up. 

The first article “The Catch 22 of Energy Storage” makes it pretty clear with solid analysis that the  EROEI – the ratio of the energy produced over the life of a power plant to the energy that was required to build it has to be over 1. As the chart below shows even that is hardly a good deal compared to others: 

morganesfig1

The second article “Why The Debate Over Energy Storage Utterly Misses The Point” goes more into the dilemma of energy storage technology. Indeed why the debate over which energy storage technology will prove to be the best in the long-term is woefully misguided since at the current stage of development, to produce the amounts of power and energy required at a cost-effective price cannot be done without government subsidies. 

The last article is a real life attempt to make an Electric car work as well as a fossil fuel driven car. It might just be me, but reading this voyage from San Diego to Whistler BC in a $140,000 Tesla sounded like low grade torture. Not only are you searching for someplace to get the vehicle charged, but the battery that runs the $140,000 car is not only losing charge, but its efficiency to hold a charge is declining as each mile goes buy. Read the artile HERE 

Artiles assembled by Rob Zurrer – Money Talks Editor

This Critical Uranium Shutdown is Going Ahead

A brief news item yesterday may be one of the most important happenings in commodities for years.

The coming shutdown of one of the largest uranium mines on the planet.

I noted a few weeks back that workers at Cameco’s McArthur River uranium mine in northern Canada were contemplating labour action. And yesterday that threat came to fruition–with the major uranium company announcing that mineworkers’ unions have authorized a full strike.

It appears this action is going to bring McArthur River to a complete standstill. With Cameco saying it is now initiating shutdown activities at the mine, and the associated Key Lake uranium processing facility.

The strike is officially slated to begin on August 30. So it looks like production here will now taper off, leading up a full stop by that date.

As I mentioned previously, it’s hard to understate the effect this stoppage could have on uranium supply. Given that McArthur River is one of the world’s largest and richest uranium producers, currently putting out nearly 15% of global supply itself.

Interestingly, uranium prices have been rising the last few weeks. Up over 10% since the beginning of August, when news of the potential strike action at McArthur began to surface–currently selling for $31 per pound.

GraphEngine-1.ashx

This is the most notable increase in prices the uranium market has seen for years (albeit from a very low base, with prices having recently fallen to a near-decade low of $28). Suggesting that buyers are paying close attention to the events at McArthur, and the potential effects on global uranium supply.

GraphEngine.ashx

Cameco noted that it is continuing discussions with mineworkers over the next 72 hours leading into the strike. So a last-minute solution is still a possibility.

But absent such a five-to-midnight deal, supply and demand is about to get much tighter in this space.

Here’s to unexpected events,

Dave Forest

Uranium Mining Companies Listed in All Countries including price history & charts – Editor Money Talks

 

dforest@piercepoints.com / @piercepoints / Facebook

#3 Most Viewed Article: Gold & Oil on the Verge of Something Big…

Everyone has been calling for a bottoming Gold the last year. But the fact is that gold and gold stocks are still clearly in a bear market. Just look at the 200 day moving averages. The previous trends were down and prices have been moving sideways for the past year.

A lot of newsletter and analysts are calling a bottom. Technically it’s just a consolidation pattern. Consolidation patterns are a continuation pattern, meaning if the previous trend was down, which it was from 2011 till now, the odds favor price will continue lower after this consolidation.

If this consolidation does happen to be the bottom then we can classify it as a stage I base. Gold and gold stocks will start a new bull market, but price needs to break to the upside of this consolidation pattern. Until it breaks to the upside, it is still in a down trend.

Gold topped out over three years ago. And I am in no rush to try to pick a bottom and be a hero here. I’m just going to continue waiting on the sidelines until price confirms either a new bull market has started or for price to breakdown and we get another leg lower.

goldbear

Oil Outlook

Taking a look at the big picture of crude oil the chart looks bearish. It too has been trading in a range since 2011 and the price is nearing the apex of a consolidation pattern.

It’s important to know that a pennant formation which is what crude oil has formed are the most predictable when price breaks out of the pattern within the first 1/3rd of the formation.

The longer price consolidates and gets squeezed into the narrowing apex of the pennant pattern, the more unreliable. The trend breakout will be, and it becomes at best a 50/50 bet.

Crude oil’s previous trend was up, but it’s been consolidating for such a long time that price is now squeezed into the apex. This negates that bias for the previous trend to hold true so we have no idea which why it will breakout but when it does expect an explosive move.

A breakdown in crude oil will send price to the $70 or $75 per barrel range, and that will hammer on the Canadian dollar also. I can see $1 USD being equivalent to $1.20 Canadian in a year.

oilbear

My Gold and Oil Conclusion

Looking at the US dollar, it has been rising partly due to the euro falling. This strong dollar will put a downward pressure on commodities overall.

usdbull

Gold and oil have not been that exciting for investors since 2011 when they topped out, but both are setting up for massive moves that should last month, if not year or more. Once these new trends emerge expect to see them in the headline news every hour.

It does not matter which way these commodities breakout of the consolidation patterns. With the dollar continuing to rise and the bearish chart patterns for both gold and oil there is a good chance much lower prices are ahead.

This will catch most investor’s off guard. It’s human nature to try to predict tops and bottoms in the market. But this is why most investors get caught on the wrong side of the market. The market always has a way of catching the majority of people on the wrong side of a position.

I am happily sitting in cash with some of my investment capital waiting for gold and oil to breakout of these large patterns. I would not be surprised if we see $900 gold, gold stocks like the gold bugs index $HUI to be at $150, and $70 per barrel for crude oil. I am not saying this is what I want, but you should be mentally prepared so you can get back into cash position and so you can take advantage of falling prices with me.

Big money will be made on the next price movements in these commodities. Whether we have to go long the market or short sell the market. Either way, we can make money. So don’t be a hero and try to pick a top or bottom, just wait for confirmed breakout then invest with the trend.

Would you like my trade alerts CLICK HERE

Want my SP500 trades executed for you in your brokerage account CLICK HERE

Charting your way to financial freedom,

Chris Vermeulen

P.S. My automated trading system is approved to be traded in both your IRA and ROTH IRA accounts also. Now you can make more money and not have to pay taxes – Click Here

Juniors & Midtiers Poised for M&A-Fueled Breakout Once Gold Recovers

Some targets in this interview:

Keep the Faith says Michael Fowler senior mining analyst with Toronto-based Loewen, Ondaatje & McCutcheon. Fowler predicts when gold breaks out, mining M&A will take off. He expects the major producers to lead the next rush of M&A. The majors want development-stage companies with high-grade, near-term production assets.

COMPANIES MENTIONED: ALAMOS GOLD : CENTAMIN : FORTUNE MINERALS : GOLDCORP INC. :GUYANA GOLDFIELDS : PRETIUM RESOURCES :PRIMERO MINING : RANDGOLD RESOURCES : SEMAFO : ST ANDREW GOLDFIELDS : TOREX GOLD RESOURCES

compassgold82The Gold Report: A report titled “M&A and Capital Raising in Mining and Metals, 1H 2014” from Ernest and Young (EY) says that mining and metals deal values in H1/2014 are “down 69% year-on-year, to $16.7 billion ($16.7B), from $53.8B, with deal volumes down 34% over the same period.” Why aren’t more mergers and acquisitions (M&A) happening in the precious metals space?

Michael Fowler: The first reason is that there are some big egos in the mining sector and some mining companies would prefer to go it alone or at least be in charge. But if both companies want to be in charge, someone is going to lose out. Ego is a big factor.

Pretium Resources Inc. will be looked at strongly by some larger companies.

Job entrenchment is a second reason. CEOs, for example, want to keep their jobs versus being kicked to the curb.

Third is asset quality. Miners looking at other companies believe that their own assets are of superior quality and those of targeted companies are poor. Generally, asset quality is not high.

Number four is transaction costs. It costs a lot of money to make a transaction, especially for small companies with limited cash.

TGR: Obviously, there were more transactions last year and the quality of assets couldn’t have changed a lot since. How do you define poor quality?

MF: We define that by the return to the prospective acquirer. As companies look at some of these assets, they see decreasing mining grade or reserve grade. That means cash margins will be less than what they would have been, say, 10 years ago. Grade plays a large role in determining the economics of putting a deposit into production and making a profit. I should note, too, that recently I have seen too many overly optimistic feasibility studies and scoping studies or what they now call preliminary economic assessments (PEA). Generally, asset quality isn’t that high.

TGR: Overly optimistic feasibility studies and PEAs. Are you suggesting that recoveries won’t be as high as expected? That capital numbers are generally too low? Mine life will be shorter? All of the above?

MF: All of the above and more, particularly in the case of PEAs. The stated returns in some of these reports are far too optimistic.

TGR: EY estimates that mining-focused private equity funds may have as much as $10B ready to deploy in the mining sector. What is private equity seeking?

MF: Most of the private equity firms want big assets. They are not interested in small exploration plays or tiny companies. They want assets that are in production or near production, perhaps offloaded by majors looking to trim debt; other targets could be companies with big development projects with juicy returns. Pretium Resources Inc. (PVG:TSX; PVG:NYSE) is one example. In April, Boston-based Liberty Metals & Mining Holdings bought roughly 5.78 million (5.78M) Pretium common shares at CA$6.92 apiece and received a seat on the board. Private equity wants to be involved in the decision-making.

TGR: Typically, how large are these private equity deals?

MF: Private equity generally wants to have a big chunk of a company, typically 10–20%, maybe more in some cases. It’s about having a say in what these companies do.

TGR: Why not outright takeovers?

MF: A huge amount of private equity has not been deployed into the resource business. I don’t think private equity is particularly comfortable with it. Most private equity managers don’t have the expertise to actually run a mine. They generally prefer a big stake, but not actually run the company.

TGR: Are institutional bidders going to start bidding up these stocks or does the market rise owing to greater M&A speculation and activity? Which comes first?

MF: The institutions are going to be more actively involved in the space but they want to see more cost cutting, better earnings and cash flow, and generally good fundamentals in the gold sector. Institutions shunned the sector because there was tremendous cost inflation. Now it’s going the other way. If the gold price goes up, M&A activity will gain steam.

TGR: If M&A gains steam, who would be the likely aggressors? Is it the large-cap producers? The midtiers? Small cash-flowing juniors?

MF: The majors are still in the game for good quality assets. We saw that with Yamana Gold Inc. (YRI:TSX; AUY:NYSE; YAU:LSE) and Agnico-Eagle Mines Ltd. (AEM:TSX; AEM:NYSE) taking over Osisko Mining. There are other assets out there with reasonable quality and some of the majors may well pick them up.

TGR: As you said, Osisko and Yamana just did a deal. Kinross Gold Corp. (K:TSX; KGC:NYSE) has taken some write-downs, as have Barrick and Newmont. With the exception of Goldcorp Inc. (G:TSX; GG:NYSE), the list of majors doesn’t extend much beyond those names. It is generally understood that the major producers are focused on fixing internal problems, many of which were caused by aggressive M&A.

MF: It’s a good point but at the end of the day these companies have to face the reality that their reserves are depleting because they have not invested a lot in exploration. When we’re talking about a $10B company, companies trading for, say, $200–300M are still doable for a major. The activity level won’t be nearly the same as what it was in the past, but I can foresee an increase in that kind of transaction.

TGR: What else do you foresee in M&A?

MF: I also see an increase in juniors merging, despite what I said about egos. At the moment small producers don’t receive much interest in the stock market so they will probably be forced to merge to reach a bigger critical mass. An example of that would be Primero Mining Corp. (PPP:NYSE; P:TSX) merging with Brigus.

TGR: Is it more cost effective to buy gold production than build it?

MF: No. If you look at where the producers are trading, there’s not much to gain by taking over a producer based on the cost versus the return.

It does make sense, though, for majors to take over companies with development projects. Those are trading at much lower multiples than producing companies. There’s an accretion factor to the bigger company in those transactions. An example would be Torex Gold Resources Inc. (TXG:TSX). That company is not in production but it’s fully financed and its El Limon-Guajes gold-silver project is high grade. Torex is in the sights of some majors.

TGR: Did Torex finance El Limon-Guajes on favorable terms?

MF: It’s $400M; the actual terms were LIBOR plus 4% or 5%, which is not bad. Then there’s some hedging that goes with it. Torex actually got the money, which is a good thing.

TGR: How does the grade compare to similarly sized projects in Mexico?

MF: It’s one of the highest grades out there and it should actually make some good money. That’s why majors will certainly take a look at it.

TGR: In addition to El Limon-Guajes, Torex also has the Media Luna deposit, which has a large Inferred resource. Is that being priced into the stock?

MF: Probably not. Media Luna is an added bonus.

TGR: You mentioned Pretium earlier. Industry experts speak glowingly about the grade at Pretium and Brucejack’s potential. But it’s a complex project that’s going to need some well-tread miners to make it work. Does that make selling that asset more difficult?

MF: Pretium is not a straightforward asset. It’s not easy to define a resource when you have such a high-grade deposit, but if a suitor is looking at Pretium, that company is going to decide how it would mine Brucejack. It may be that it’s not 2,000 tons a day through a mill but rather 1,000 tons. It’s a great deposit but nobody will know the actual grade of Brucejack until it’s mined. I still think that Pretium will be looked at strongly by some larger companies.

TGR: Do you believe that Pretium has already signed confidentiality agreements with potential suitors?

MF: The tire kickers are out there and looking at Pretium. They’re probably trying to understand exactly how big this resource is, its grade and how it can be mined for a profit.

TGR: Do you formally cover Torex and Pretium?

MF: No. Our business deals more with smaller companies. I talk about the larger companies because, quite frankly, there’s not a lot of interest in the smaller companies. There are some good investment ideas among the larger developers.

TGR: Are there other development plays with near-term production?

MF: I like Guyana Goldfields Inc. (GUY:TSX). It has the Aurora gold project in Guyana. It just did a deal with the World Bank’s International Finance Company and it’s now fully financed. It’s looking good.

TGR: Guyana is not a jurisdiction that most people are familiar with. Are other significant mines operating in Guyana?

MF: Guyana was put on the map by Cambior when it started mining the Omai gold mine in 1993. Next door, there’s Gros Rosebel in Suriname, which is still being mined by IAMGOLD Corp. (IMG:TSX; IAG:NYSE). I say Suriname because it’s still part of the Guiana Shield in South America. The government of Guyana is fairly mining-friendly and it generally follows British law. It’s not a bad spot to be, although there is a net smelter royalty on production.

TGR: Is the royalty worse than what companies have to pay in Mexico?

MF: Guyana’s tax regime is not too bad. The royalties and mining taxes are all in one package. Guyana Goldfields should make very good returns from its Aurora project, despite the royalty.

TGR: What are some smaller producers you’re following?

MF: I like companies with nice growth potential. Many of the senior producers are offloading assets, lowering their costs and there’s not much growth there.

I like midtier producers like Randgold Resources Ltd. (GOLD:NASDAQ; RRS:LSE)SEMAFO Inc. (SMF:TSX; SMF:OMX)Centamin Plc (CEE:TSX; CNT:ASX, CEY:LSE) and Alamos Gold Inc. (AGI:TSX). Those are good growth stories that are in good financial shape.

TGR: Randgold, Centamin and SEMAFO are all based primarily in different parts of Africa. Is it easier to grow a mining company in African countries?

MF: Companies like Randgold, SEMAFO and, to a certain extent, Centamin, have a fair amount of experience in Africa. Randgold is in Mali, Burkina Faso and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It understands operating in these countries. SEMAFO has been in Burkina Faso for quite a few years. It’s a similar story for Centamin in Egypt. It can be difficult to produce gold in Africa but if you have experienced people and good operators, it’s doable.

Alamos is different. It’s has been successful in Mexico but now it’s making a foray into Turkey, which is causing some issues. But, generally, those are growth companies.

TGR: Randgold is having some teething issues at the Kibali operation in the DRC. Is that a concern?

MF: Randgold started well at Kibali then had a problem in the underground. Generally, the grade is good and the company should be able to expand production there. It also has AngloGold Ashanti Ltd. (AU:NYSE; ANG:JSE; AGG:ASX) as a joint operator. Overall, it has been a reasonable startup. There have been much worse startups in other countries, like Canada, for example.

TGR: SEMAFO has a development project in Burkina Faso. What do you know about that?

MF: That’s very positive. There was always a feeling that the grade at Mana would go down and therefore production would, too. But SEMAFO found a satellite gold deposit not far from its Siou mill. It’s high grade, the stripping ratio is favorable and is certainly accretive to production, cash flow and earnings. That’s a big positive. I see SEMAFO growing in the future. The company also rid itself of some poorly performing assets, one in Guinea, the other in Niger. It’s focused on Burkina Faso.

TGR: Do you see SEMAFO playing a role in the next round of M&A?

MF: I see it potentially getting involved in M&A, but it may not be by choice. Someone may come along and attack the company. When I last talked with management my understanding was that it wants to stick to its knitting in Burkina Faso. But it certainly could be a target for someone else.

TGR: Alamos Gold has the Kirazli and Aği Daği development-stage gold projects in Turkey, which have yet to receive the required environmental permits. Does the company have the right people to work out those issues in Turkey? Eldorado Gold Corp. (ELD:TSX; EGO:NYSE) has certainly had success there.

MF: Yes, Eldorado has done well. Alacer Gold Corp. (ASR:TSX: AQG:ASX) is in production at the Çöpler mine and is doing very well there. The basic mining environment in Turkey is not bad. Alamos has environmental issues to work through but it’s only a matter of time before it is able to mine those projects. It took Eldorado time to get its environmental permits at some of its Turkish assets, too.

TGR: Let’s talk about some companies you cover. One is Fortune Minerals Ltd. (FT:TSX). It recently received an extension to buy the 88% of the Revenue silver mine in Colorado that it doesn’t already own. Does acquiring that asset finally get the market’s attention?

MF: To be honest, I was a little surprised at what Fortune did. The market is a bit confused as well. Its former strategy was to finance or joint venture the NICO gold-cobalt-bismuth-copper project in the Northwest Territories, probably with help from an Asian company. Priority No. 2 was the Arctos coal deposit in British Columbia. The decision to buy the rest of the Revenue mine came out of the blue.

It was getting difficult to finance NICO and Fortune wanted to get some market attention in the short term by being opportunistic and buying a silver producer. I think the market is taking a wait and see attitude. After Fortune takes over this producer, it will get more market attention once it starts producing silver according to plan. There are a lot of risks associated with that plan but it could be a very good idea, should it work. Fortune has good, very chunky assets. Fortune could be a target for a private equity fund because it’s got such big assets.

TGR: What other companies do you cover?

MF: One that I cover is St Andrew Goldfields Ltd. (SAS:TSX). Primero Mining bought Brigus Gold and its Grey Fox gold deposit, which is next to St Andrew’s Hislop gold mine. The whole area is crying out for consolidation. I think that Primero bought the wrong company. Nonetheless, Primero started a process that is going to continue and St Andrew will be part of that consolidation at the end of the day.

St Andrew is a very inexpensive junior producer that produces about 85,000 ounces per year and that’s not exciting the market. Some of these junior producers need to merge to reach a critical mass so that they can afford their fixed costs. There are potential synergies in the old Brigus and St Andrew because they’re right next to each other.

TGR: What’s St Andrew doing to lower its costs?

MF: It’s efficiently mining. It is increasing the throughput at the Holt mill, which is an extremely good asset. Its main asset is the Holt mine. Next door to it is the Holloway mine and farther down the trend is Hislop. The Holt mine produces about 85% of its profits.

TGR: What are St Andrew’s current all-in costs?

MF: About $1,050/ounce. The company published its earnings in mid-August, and those were nil versus nil so that’s nothing to jump up and down about. I’m recommending it because it’s very inexpensive and I see it as part of the M&A potential of that area.

TGR: You have been in this business for some time and you have seen market ups and downs. Please talk investors off the ledge.

MF: Keep the faith. There has been too much gloom and doom. It’s a cyclical business and it will turn around. My favorite space at the moment is the junior to midtier producers. I see some of these stocks breaking out. The sentiment has definitely improved. As long as you’re in good-quality stocks that are not a financial mess, you should see good returns.

TGR: Thank you for talking with us, Michael.

Michael Fowler, senior mining analyst with Loewen, Ondaatje, McCutcheon Ltd., has worked in the investment industry since 1987 as a base and precious metals mining analyst for numerous high-profile firms. His coverage list included the major North American gold mining companies, but is now focused on small- to mid-sized companies. Previously, Fowler worked as a geophysicist involved in mineral exploration for 10 years. He was involved in the discovery of the high-grade Cigar Lake uranium mine in Northern Saskatchewan in the early 1980s. Fowler holds a Master of Business Administration from Cranfield University, UK; a Master of Science in mineral exploration from Leicester University, UK; and a Bachelor of Science in geology with geophysics from Liverpool University, UK. He is a member of the Institution of Materials in the UK and a member of the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.

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

Related Articles

 

 

DISCLOSURE: 
1) Brian Sylvester 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 independent contractor. He owns, or his 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: Guyana Goldfields Inc., Pretium Resources Inc., Primero Mining Corp. and St Andrew Goldfields Ltd. Goldcorp Inc. is not affiliated with Streetwise Reports. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.
3) Michael Fowler: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. 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 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.

 

The Coming Super Spike in Oil Prices

4f38034b-cbd6-4b04-a992-70fe789a2eb3In 2005, Goldman Sachs oil analyst Arjun Murti wrote of an oil “super spike”, with prices reaching $200 a barrel.  Murti was amazingly prophetic with that call, as oil topped $147 a barrel in 2008 and would likely have made his predicted $200 had the general economy not suffered an historic meltdown.

Now I am seeing another opportunity for $200 oil, even though the current oil market looks more ready to drop to $75 first.  It might do that, but then I can see the coming of the next major oil “spike” – and I’m also looking for at least a $150 target.  

What inspired the first ‘super spike’ in 2008 was both fundamental – the new appetite for energy from the emerging markets of China and India, but moreover financial – the new drive for investment in oil, a phenomenon I outlined in my book “Oil’s Endless Bid”.  

What will inspire this next one is somewhat different.  Let’s take 2007.  EM countries did create a rapidly increasing demand for oil barrels.  But what we also even more significantly had was a rapidly expanding demand for financial oil barrels — for investment – that I posited entirely outraced the fundamentals.

Today, we have global energy demand that similarly continues to increase, but it is accompanied by a global risk of supply disruption greater than any I have ever seen in 25 years – and an almost certain lack of production growth in the future.

Let’s forget the United States for the moment, where it’s been supposed that the supply from domestic shale oil will trump whatever shortages might emerge globally.  Even if the US does obtain a high-water mark of 10 or 11 million barrels a day (which I doubt), it still does not come close to counteracting the shortages in a 92m (and growing) barrel a day oil market that are occurring everywhere else.

Iraq: now pumping less than 3m barrels a day, it was expected to supply up to 6m in the next few years.
Iran: Sanctions will again slow their production increases as their nuclear program continues unabated.
Saudi Arabia: 10m barrels a day today is likely full potential production.  
Libya:  Practically off-line and likely to remain so.
Egypt: Civil unrest continues and slows production growth.
Nigeria: How long before current Ebola outbreaks cause quarantines and slowdowns?
North Sea: Fast running dry
Russia: Rosneft/Exxon Arctic project projecting significant forward growth in trouble with sanction war ratcheting higher.
Canada: Oil sands under continuing environmental/transport pressure

There are, however, other potential replacement reserves that might be developed – particularly offshore the US coast, in Mexico and Brazil — but these are very expensive barrels indeed.  The price of spot oil makes developing these reserves difficult.  But even more, the price of future oil – represented currently by a deeply backwardated futures curve—makes most near and mid-term development of these resources economically impossible. You need only witness the continuing swoon of offshore drilling stocks to understand just how little new investment by the Majors is being undertaken.

So, let’s get the full 2014 picture:  We have, I believe, an oncoming massive shortage of crude; but unlike 2008, we cannot get the financial markets to recognize it and incentivize necessary production.  Instead of a financial market that’s outracing the fundamentals, we now have a fundamentally at-risk market where the financials are unable to catch up.  

What happens in a situation like this and when does it happen?

What I expect is a real global shortage of energy – small to begin with, but fast growing more and more dire throughout 2015 – until the system of fundamental and financial oil again break with each other, as they did in the run-up in 2008.

You will ultimately need a future oil price that incentivizes the development of the more expensive barrels to relieve this coming shortage – and knowing how markets always overdo their needs, I expect this to be a ‘super spike’ not unlike the last one.

Perhaps finally reaching Arjun Murti’s original target.

….also inside the Newsletter HERE:

Inside Opportunities – Why A Supposed Telecom Company Should Be In Your Energy Portfolio

Executive Report – Coal Exports from West Coast Running Out of Time

Inside Intelligence – Global Energy Advisory – 22nd August 2014

Inside Markets – Summer Sell-off in Energy Futures Markets Coming to an End?