Energy & Commodities

UnknownCommodity markets saw big winners and losers this week.

This week was an eventful one for commodities. On the one hand, energy, gold and silver surged. On the other hand, platinum, palladium and grains plunged. At the same time, stocks— as measured by the S&P 500—edged lower after hitting record highs on Monday. The large-cap index fell by less than 1 percent, bringing its year-to-date gain down to 4.6 percent.

Macroeconomic Highlights

There were a handful of economic releases this week, but none were big market movers. In China…..

…continue reading this weekly commodity report HERE

T. Boone Pickens On The Next Billion (Barrels of Oil)

UnknownKnown for his saying that “the first billion is the hardest,” oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens addressed the Stansberry Society Conference in Dallas at the end of May with a plea for a national energy plan that takes advantage of the billions of barrels of oil being produced each day in the U.S. for domestic use. First addressing the audience, and then in conversation with event host Porter Stansberry, followed by an all-star energy investing panel, the Pickens Plan advocate was optimistic about the prospects for growing the country and individual investment portfolios through smart use of natural resources.

COMPANIES MENTIONED: DEVON ENERGY CORP. :ENERGY XXI : HALCÓN RESOURCES CORP.

On making (and losing money): I moved to Dallas from West Texas in 1989 worth about $25 million ($25M). I ran that $25M up to $4 billion ($4B) in 2007. 2008 and 2009 were a disaster. I lost $2B. I’ve given away over $1B and have $1B left.

On leveraging the oil and gas renaissance in the U.S.: I launched the Pickens Plan in 2008 because I felt that I was running out of time, and this country desperately needs an energy plan. We’re the only country in the world without one. We use more oil than any other country, 18 million barrels a day (18 MMbpd) with China’s 10 MMbpd a distant second, and we import about half of what we use.

Five years ago, we discovered the biggest gas field in the world, the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania. We are now the world’s largest natural gas producer; we have more reserves of natural gas than any other country in the world. That is huge for this country. It’s huge for the world. It is going to change the dynamics of the oil and gas industry. It’s a renaissance that started in the U.S.

We have the cheapest fuel of any country in the world. Our oil here is 10% cheaper. Our natural gas is 75% cheaper. Our gasoline is 50% cheaper. We’re now moving businesses back to the U.S because of cheap energy.

On the challenges to energy independence: The only problem is that this administration hates the oil and gas industry. It doesn’t want to use fossil fuels. Hedge fund manager and environmentalist Thomas Fahr Steyer recently told me he is going to spend $100M to block the Keystone Pipeline and he wants to get rid of all fossil fuels. His plan to replace all that transportation fuel is to ask the government to find an alternative. We’ll see what happens with that.

Some politicians say that we need to export more oil, we should go to Europe and fix the Russian dominance of natural gas, but it’s not doable. We will not have one liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility until late 2015, over a year from now.

The biggest problem is that this country has never had an energy plan.

On use of the reserve: Go back to the Arab oil embargo in 1973. We were cut off from the Mideast’s oil and it scared the devil out of everybody. In 1974, we passed a law requiring a 750 million barrel (750 MMbbl) Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in the salt caverns in Louisiana and Mississippi just in case we had another Arab embargo. In the last 40 years, the most we have ever taken out at any one time is 28 MMbbl. So we have over 700 MMbbl in storage, and the greatest amount we’ve taken out at one time is 28 MMbbl. Do we really need that much storage?

It would take 10 years to remove even 400 MMbbl without disrupting the market. Selling that oil would result in a profit, because it was purchased at $28/barrel ($28/bbl) and today oil is $103/bbl. That is a big profit, one of the few big profits I’ve ever seen the government have.

Profits from the reserve could be used to develop energy in America by switching all the heavy-duty trucks to natural gas. A $30,000 tax credit would roughly cover the incremental cost for converting from diesel, which is twice as expensive, to natural gas engines.

The government should use the cheapest fuel for our federal vehicles. That is its fiduciary responsibility. By making sure we use the cheapest fuel—which also happens to be 30% cleaner—we could reduce our imports by 3 MMbpd. That would put a dent in the 4–4.5 MMbpd we import from OPEC.

On funding both sides of the war: Eliminating Middle East imports is important because some portion of the money for oil purchased from OPEC inevitably goes to the Taliban. That’s not really because the Saudis are trying to hurt us; they’re just paying ransom so the Taliban will leave them alone. That means by using Mideast oil, we’re paying for both sides of the war: the Fifth Fleet to protect the world oil transport through the Straits of Hormuz while funding the terrorists that attack those transport ships. And we only get 10% of the oil we are protecting. It makes no sense. That is why I am working so hard for an energy plan.

Porter Stansberry: You have been so successful. Your commodity fund is up 24% this year and your equity fund is up 19%. You are 86 and clearly enjoying life and newly married. Why are you still in the game?

TBP: I love the game. I’m not going to do something I don’t like to do. As long as I can play the game, I’m going to bluff my way through.

PS: I think a lot of people are stuck doing jobs that they don’t love. I tell people all the time, if you don’t love what you do, if you wouldn’t do it for free, then you have no chance at being the best at it.

TBP: Excellent advice.

PS: Let’s talk commodities. Would you invest in coal or uranium? These are two energy commodities that have seen their prices plummet.

TBP: Over 40% of the power generation in the U.S. comes from coal. We’re going to have to use coal. A congressman once said to me that he was going to get rid of all coal-fired plants. I responded that if you shut down all the coal-fired plants, you could multiply the price of electric fuel by 10.

PS: They’re doing that in Germany.

TBP: They went to turbines, and they don’t even have good wind.

PS: And they invested in solar, without any sun.

TBP: At the same time France put a moratorium on fracking wells. Then they complain about relying on Russia.

PS: So you would be an investor in coal. What about uranium?

TBP: We have had three failures over the years. Another report on the viability of nuclear is on the way. I can tell you what the executive summary will say. Do not build a nuclear plant on the coast. Do not build it on seismic faults. That’s it. You can put it in stable areas and it works.

PS: So I’ll take that as a yes, you would invest in coal and uranium.

TBP: Not today, but I would, yes. There will be a time to come into both of those. I am not just an oil and gas guy. I’m a guy who wants the best, cleanest energy for America.

PS: Berkshire Hathaway Vice-Chairman Charlie Munger has said that as long as the world agrees to exchange worthless paper for oil, we should let them. To me, it sounds foolish because if you do that long enough, your paper is going to be worthless, and that’s going to cause much bigger problems. I think his argument is nonsensical, but I wondered what you thought about it.

TBP: Of course the paper dollar is worth something.

PS: Less and less every year.

TBP: I haven’t talked to Charlie face-to-face in probably five years, but I can’t agree with Charlie on that.

The Energy Report via Porter Stansberry: Does OPEC have the influence it used to have? Does the Middle East matter anymore?

TBP: It does because OPEC sets the price for oil. Of the 92 MMbbl produced every day in the world, OPEC is producing a third of it. It is big enough, and it is organized and credible. It is a cartel. 30% of oil can set the price by adjusting on spot. Saudi Arabia has made it very clear that it has to have $100/bbl for oil to meet its social commitments. Over half the people don’t work in Saudi Arabia. Theirs is not an economy that provides jobs, so Saudi Arabia has to pay its people.

Now the Iranians are a little bit squirrelly. Credibility is not that important to them. They’ll tell you they have to have about $23/bbl. But they have increased production, and China is cooperating with them. China has an energy plan and imports half its oil. China uses 10 MMbpd and imports 5 MMbpd through deals with Venezuela, Brazil and Iran. China loans them money and gets oil in payment at a discount.

PS: What do you think the chances are, in the next couple years, of finding a really huge shale oil field that can produce a 100 MMbpd well either through technology or luck?

TBP: Slim to none. East Texas was discovered in 1931. It is a huge field. It’s out of the Woodbine sand, but it comes from source rock—the shale reservoirs—that was heated, pressured and squeezed into the trap. The East Texas field is a conventional trap for oil. Even then, we knew the oil was in the shale, but not until George Mitchell, the father of fracking, did we think we could get more than 5% of the gas out of the Barnett Shale. Lo and behold, now we’re going to get 40%. We may get 80% before it’s over.

Audience Question: How long do you think it will take to get natural gas infrastructure in place in the U.S. so that conversions to natural gas engines are viable to the public?

TBP: Actually, it’s there now. I’ve got a natural gas car. I could plug it in in my garage and my fuel costs would be $1/gallon through the gas line that powers my stove. There are plenty of fueling stations in California.

PS: One last question. What’s your favorite way to profit from energy in the stock market today?

TBP: I’d get into the commodities. We’ve done a great job. Why do you think the economy has recovered in the U.S.? It’s all due to energy.

But let me make one request. I’ve got 2.5M people signed up with me in PickensPlan.com. Please join us.

PS: Thank you very, very much for your time.

(Editor’s note: We followed the T. Boone Pickens discussion and a panel discussion on the shale boom with some questions of our own for Porter Stansberry and his associate, Matt Badiali.)

TER: Porter, I would like to ask you to answer the question you asked T. Boone. Based on the new technologies like zipper fracking and the challenge of a lack of infrastructure, how do you suggest gaining exposure to the energy market?

PS: There are a lot of opportunities in the energy sector because as the cost of dry holes disappears and as production methods become more efficient, the cost of production will decline. Eventually that should lead to lower oil prices, which sounds bad at first. But, as long as margins remain reasonably robust, lower total energy prices will actually increase demand substantially. . .and that will power the industry forward for decades, not merely for a period of temporary high prices.

The best way over the next few years to profit from these trends is to gain the arbitrage between the low domestic price of oil and gas and the higher international price. That’s why there’s been an explosion in propane exports. These “refined” products and all of the infrastructure associated with them will do very well over the next three to five years. Firms that are able to vertically integrate from wellhead to export markets will do best. “Capture the arb” will be the strategy that wins in the medium term.

The best way over the longer term to participate in these trends is to focus on buying the most attractive energy resources at the lowest possible price. That’s why we see companies like Devon Energy Corp. (DVN:NYSE), for example, making material changes to their asset base, selling off marginal assets and focusing their production and exploration activities in the highest quality shales close to centers of distribution.

We think Devon is in the midst of a substantial turnaround that will transform the company into one of the country’s large producers of crude oil. Its U.S.-based oil production is now increasing at over a 50% annual pace, and it owns large amounts of acreage in the most attractive area in the two best shale plays in the U.S.—the Permian and the Eagle Ford.

Devon also owns a very large legacy asset, the third largest natural gas reserves in the U.S., mostly located in the in the Barnett Shale. These gas assets are far more valuable than the market currently realizes, as they are the key to the international arbitrage strategy I mentioned earlier. They will become far more attractive to investors as more and more export facilities are built in the U.S.

Thus, with Devon, investors are getting world class (but currently “stranded”) natural gas reserves plus all the liquids growth of a more highly focused shale oil driller like EOG Resources Inc. (EOG:NYSE). Best of all, given its controlling interest in EnLink Midstream LLC (where it owns 70% of the general partner), we also believe that Devon is uniquely vertically integrated to take advantage of all export opportunities, both currently available (with propane) and in the future with crude oil.

Today Devon’s assets trade at a huge discount to the other shale oil drillers. There’s a wide gap between the value we perceive going forward and the market’s current view.

TER: What are some other companies that fit that investing approach?

PS: Energy XXI (EXXI:NASDAQ) fits into the second, longer-term strategy, owning the best assets in good locations. Its strategy is to buy large, existing conventional reservoirs of oil and gas in the shallow Gulf areas and, using new technologies, revive production. It has zero exploration risk. Energy XXI is located very close to the major distribution areas of the Gulf Coast, and it has low production costs because of the conventional nature of the reservoirs. The company also has a kicker. It owns a share in nearly a dozen ultra-deep wells that contain trillions of cubic feet of gas and could also contain huge amounts of oil. If these wells can be put into production, Energy XXI could quickly become a major producer of hydrocarbons. I like this strategy, and because so much investor attention is focused on onshore production right now, good Gulf of Mexico resources have simply been forgotten.

TER: Matt, same question: How will new technologies open new investing opportunities and what companies are well positioned to take advantage of those opportunities?

Matt Badiali: The economics of shale wells are improving every single day. Sometimes it’s due to new techniques like zipper fracking, sometimes it’s due to simply longer horizontal legs and more sand in the fracks. Halcón Resources Corp. (HK:NASDAQ) is a great example of this. It could easily be the next EOG Resources or the next Petrohawk Energy Corp. (HK:NYSE), which BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP:NYSE) bought for $12.1B. Halcón is the management team from Petrohawk, reunited to do it all again.

T. Boone Pickens is a geologist, entrepreneur in the oil and gas industry and chair of the hedge fund BP Capital Management. He is also the author of “The First Billion is the Hardest: Reflections on a Life of Comebacks and America’s Energy Future.” He is an outspoken advocate for U.S. energy independence and advocates for an energy plan in public appearances and through his Pickens Plan website.

Porter Stansberry founded Stansberry & Associates Investment Research, a private publishing company based in Baltimore, Maryland, in 1999. His monthly newsletter, Stansberry’s Investment Advisory, deals with safe-value investments poised to give subscribers years of exceptional returns. Stansberry oversees a staff of investment analysts whose expertise ranges from value investing to insider trading to short selling. Together, Stansberry and his research team do exhaustive amounts of real-world independent research. They’ve visited more than 200 companies in order to find the best low-risk investments. Prior to launching Stansberry & Associates Investment Research, Stansberry was the first American editor of the Fleet Street Letter, the oldest English-language financial newsletter.

Matt Badiali is the editor of the S&A Resource Report, a monthly investment advisory that focuses on natural resources, including silver, uranium, copper, natural gas, oil, water and gold. He is a regular contributor to Growth Stock Wire, a free pre-market briefing on the day’s most profitable trading opportunities. Badiali has experience as a hydrologist, geologist and consultant to the oil industry. He holds a master’s degree in geology from Florida Atlantic University.

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 recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Streetwise Interviews page.

Related Articles

 

 

DISCLOSURE:
1) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Energy XXI. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services. 
2) Porter Stansberry: 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. 
3) Matt Badiali: 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.

 

Why A New Uranium Bull Market Is Inevitable

Uranium Is Going to Double or Triple… But There’s One Problem
 

Markets work…

 

That was the lesson we heard from CEO of Sprott U.S. Holdings, Rick Rule. Rick is a master resource investor. He has made many millions for himself and his clients. And last month, he gave one of the best presentations at the Stansberry Society Natural Resources Conference.

 

My publisher Porter Stansberry – who hosted the event – had challenged him to talk about the world’s most-hated commodity. As Rick noted, that’s a “target-rich environment.”

 

Many commodities have been in multiyear bear markets. Very few are popular these days.

 

But there’s one commodity more hated than all the others…

 

Rick considered talking about water… He considered agricultural minerals… He considered platinum-group metals… He considered coal… But he settled on uranium, which fuels nuclear power plants.

 

“People HATE uranium,” he said.

 

And it feels familiar…

 

During the uranium bear market of the 1990s, Rick was bullish. And after his speeches, folks would call him “despicable.” They couldn’t believe someone would want to make money on the asset associated with the nuclear disasters of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.

 

But at the time, uranium cost $20 a pound to mine… and it sold for $10 – a negative 50% operating margin. That can’t last. And it didn’t…

 

From 2000 to 2007, uranium shot from $10 to $130.

 

And then it crashed… Prices are down to about $28 a pound today. But it now costs an average of $70 per pound to mine. And the public sentiment is terrible. The March 2011 disaster at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant is still fresh.

 

This situation won’t last, either… It’s basic economics. When mines are losing money on every pound of uranium, eventually they’ll stop mining it. Supply will contract. Meanwhile, demand is assured…

 

Folks might not like the idea of nuclear power, but they need it. It generates about 20% of the U.S. electricity supply. In France, it’s more than 70%. And fast-growing emerging markets need to add to their capacity. As Rick said, either we use nuclear power… or the lights go out.

 

Eventually the low supply and steady or growing demand will push prices higher. That’s how markets work. And in resources, markets work “in spades.”

 

Uranium prices won’t just move to the cost of production… They’ll overshoot it, just like they did in the early 2000s. “When you get this right,” Rick said, the gains you can make are “truly stupid.”

 

The problem, of course, is the timing.

 

Back in November, I wrote a bullish piece on uranium.

 

It doesn’t take great news to double the price of a cheap, hated asset… things just need to go from “bad to less bad.” And it looks like that’s starting to happen in uranium.

 

As you can see from the chart of Uranium Participation Corp – which rises and falls with the price of uranium – that rally continued for a few more months… then reversed all the way back to the previous lows.
 
xW-29868956 L46FX7HLUN
 
Taking a look at the longer-term chart, you can see uranium has been grinding out a bottom for years now.

 
It could take another year or two before it’s ready to turn.
 
xM-10762146 48331QMGAE
 
Eventually, though, prices here have to rise. And in a rip-roaring bull market, they could rise three- or fourfold.

 
When that happens, Rick said, “the fact that you were bored or scared or early doesn’t matter.” In other words, you need to be patient… and willing to take a few small losses along the way.
 
A new uranium bull market might not begin for a while. It might not be “imminent,” Rick said… but it’s “inevitable.” Remember, markets work.
 
Good trading,
 

Amber Lee Mason

 
 
Further Reading:

Matt Badiali says another commodity is at “no-brainer” prices right now – coal. “If prices don’t head higher, most coal producers will have to close some of their mines or face bankruptcy,” he says. “This is exactly what contrarian investors like to see.” Get all the details here.
 
In this classic interview, Rick Rule reveals how to master the giant cycles in natural resources… and make life-changing profits. If you’re looking to make money in the resource sector, this interview is a must-read.

 
 


 
 

We Need More Tungsten & 12 Stocks Poised To Take Advantage

Catch-22: We Need More Tungsten, But Projects Can’t Find Funding

Even as demand rises steadily, the world’s largest non-Chinese tungsten mine will be exhausted by next year. So investors should be lining up to fund new mines, right? Not a bit of it, says analyst Mark Seddon of Tungsten Market Research. In this interview with The Mining Report, Seddon argues that a supply shortage could mean much higher prices, leading to handsome profits for those companies that get to market soonest.

imagesCOMPANIES MENTIONED: ALMONTY INDUSTRIES INC. : BLACKHEATH RESOURCES INC. : CARBINE TUNGSTEN LTD. : HAZELWOOD RESOURCES LTD. :LARGO RESOURCES LTD. : NORTH AMERICAN TUNGSTEN CORP. LTD. : NORTHCLIFF RESOURCES LTD. : ORMONDE MINING PLC : VITAL METALS LTD. : WOLF MINERALS LTD. : WOULFE MINING CORP.

The Mining Report: Tungsten is often called “rare.” Just how rare is it?

Mark Seddon: It’s not that rare compared to a minor metal such as rhenium, which is used in superalloys. The total rhenium market is maybe 70 or 80 tons per year, whereas the tungsten market is currently around 80,000 tons (80 Kt) per year of tungsten metal content. So tungsten’s nothing like a rare earth element (REE), but it is considered a strategic metal.

TMR: How is tungsten strategic or critical?

MS: It’s strategic in that it has industrial uses. It’s used in hard metals, cutting tools, etc. It has military applications, as well. The U.S. Defense Logistics Agency built up a stockpile of tungsten over a number of years, which it has pretty much sold off now.

And tungsten is a critical metal due to China’s dominance of the market. China accounts for 80% or more of supply in various forms.

TMR: Tungsten is often compared to rare earths, but the latter’s price is highly dependent on high tech. This is not true of tungsten, correct?

MS: Yes. Tungsten’s main uses are industrial; the largest end user is in cemented carbides, what are known as hard metals. Those can be used in things like cutting tools, mining tools, drill bits and wear parts. So tungsten’s demand curve tends to follow gross domestic product growth quite closely, whereas REE demand growth is more volatile.

TMR: But tungsten prices are rising.

MS: Yes, tungsten has risen in price because of a change in Chinese policy. Some 10–15 years ago, you could buy as much tungsten as you wanted from China, and the price of ammonium paratungstate (APT) fell to about $100/metric ton unit ($100/mtu). APT rose to a peak of $470/mtu in 2011 and was above $400/mtu in 2013.

Recently, the market has been a bit quiet. Today, APT sells for about $370/mtu.

TMR: So would it be reasonable to say that, as with REEs and other metals, the Chinese have decided they want to keep production for internal use?

MS: China is now less interested in exporting natural resources and much more interested in adding value to them. Internal demand in China for tungsten, REEs and so on has been increasing as its GDP has grown, recently about 7–10%/year.

China has made very little investment in new tungsten mines, so it is really struggling to maintain production at current levels, which also would put pressure on exports because, obviously, it just doesn’t have the material available for export.

TMR: Given the tightening of supply, where can we expect tungsten prices to go by 2020? 

MS: In the short term, I expect that prices will end 2014 quite a bit higher than now and continue rising in 2015. The only significant new supplier that has entered the market recently is the Nui Phao project in Vietnam. This is owned by the Masan Group, which is privately held. It came onstream in 2013, and is, as far as I know, still ramping up to production capacity.

In the longer term, major new tungsten supply will likely not enter the market until the second half of 2015. So the pressure on prices is really going to be upward, especially considering that Europe expects reasonable economic growth this year and slightly better than that in 2015. My feeling is that production shortages will result in rising prices at least until 2016–2017. Then, depending on how much new supply enters the market, a leveling off may occur.

TMR: Given that there’s no futures market for tungsten, prices are determined by individual end-user contracts, correct?

MS: Yes. Tungsten prices are discovered, if you will, from data on ores, concentrates and APT provided by such publishers as MetalBulletinMetal-Pages and Platts. The main price that’s followed is ATP. There are two prices in China: the internal Chinese price and the export price, which is a shipped-on-board Chinese port price. There’s also a European APT price. However, because China dominates the market so thoroughly, Western prices tend to follow the Chinese example.

TMR: Given the paucity of non-Chinese supply and the exhaustion of North American Tungsten Corp. Ltd.’s (NTC:TSX) CanTung mine in Canada by 2015, how great is the need for new Western tungsten mines?

MS: The need is fairly great. CanTung is the largest single mine outside China, with production of about 2.8 Kt/year tungsten metal content, about 3.5% of global supply. As you say, it’s nearing exhaustion, and its production will have to be replaced. It’s unlikely to be replaced by the Chinese. Steady growth in tungsten demand of 4–5% per year, which is lower than it has been for the last decade, would add, say, 3–5 Kt per year tungsten metal to demand. Current producers outside China do not have the capacity to increase production significantly.

TMR: So how many new mines will be required to meet this rising demand?

MS: Pretty much one major new project coming onstream every year.

TMR: What is the average initial capital expense (capex) of tungsten projects compared to other metals?

MS: I would say no more than $100 million ($100M), probably a bit less. Quite a few current projects reside in the $50–75M range.

TMR: That’s quite modest.

MS: Absolutely.

TMR: That raises the question of why tungsten projects have such difficulty in being funded, especially given expected rising demand and prices. 

MS: One of the biggest problems is that tungsten is not a terminally traded product, like gold, silver, copper, etc. So banks have difficulty in hedging their price risk. I’ve done quite a lot of work for various projects producing marketing reports and price forecasts, and my experience has been that 50% of potential banks and other institutional investors reject tungsten projects out of hand due to the lack of futures markets and the hedging they provide. The other 50% simply doesn’t know much about tungsten, and so it is quite low on their list of priorities.

This funding deficit is obviously not just a problem for tungsten mines. It applies to rare earths, antimony, graphite and other minor minerals.

TMR: Tungsten is not as glamorous as metals such as gold and silver and, as discussed above, is not high-tech, like rare earths. Is this part of the problem?

MS: That’s certainly a possibility. Tungsten’s uses are almost exclusively industrial, so it’s a steady metal, not a sexy one. It is perceived that the rewards to be gained in REEs might be that much greater, but then obviously the risks associated would also be greater.

Tungsten is not a metal that is much discussed, unlike rare earths, which have been featured in the global media since 2011, when the Chinese export restriction become widely known. However, studies done by the European Union, etc., place tungsten in the top three of most-critical metals.

TMR: There was a long article about tungsten in the Financial Times in March.

MS: True, but that’s probably the first major article on tungsten in the Financial Times for years, even though China’s export restrictions are a decade old.

TMR: Significant past European tungsten production originated from the Iberian Peninsula. Are we seeing significant developments there today?

MS: Almonty Industries Inc.’s (AII:TSX.V) Los Santos mine in Spain is actually producing. It’s not a huge operation. It just published its production figures for Q1/14: 17 mtu tungsten trioxide (WO3) or 135 tons tungsten metal content for the quarter. If that trend continues, it would mean 540 tons/year tungsten metal produced annually.

TMR: What’s the most advanced Iberian project?

MS: The Barruecopardo project, also in Spain, which is owned by Ormonde Mining Plc (ORM:LSE), an Irish company. Almonty tried to buy that project, but its bid was rejected by Ormonde.

TMR: Would Barruecopardo be a bigger project than Los Santos? 

MS: About three times larger: 1,800 tons/year tungsten metal. As much as CanTung produces, about 2.5% of current global production.

TMR: Ormonde published a definitive feasibility study (DFS) in February 2012. When is production scheduled to begin?

MS: Barruecopardo is still not fully funded, so it’s difficult to say.

TMR: According to the DFS, the project has a pre-tax net present value (NPV) of $164.5M, a 52% internal rate of return (IRR) and a two-year payback period. The capex is $66.5M, and the Noble Group has agreed to buy the first five years of tungsten concentrate produced. So why isn’t this project fully funded?

MS: There are quite a few tungsten projects working toward full funding. Many of them reach something similar to what Hollywood calls “development hell,” where the studio has the script but can’t get started without funding, and it goes around and around.

TMR: Is there a major European project that has got full funding?

MS: The Wolf Minerals Ltd. (WLF:ASX) project at Hemerdon in Devon, England, has fully met its initial capex of $197M, but that took quite a while. Construction has begun, and production should begin in H2/15: about 2.8 Kt tungsten metal annually over an initial 10-year mine life.

TMR: In this environment, how much of a premium is attached to getting a mine in production first?

MS: Hemerdon’s projected operating cost is about $105/mtu APT. Compare that to the current APT price of $370/mtu, and you can forecast a high margin, if prices remain at similar levels. So the earlier a company can get into this market, the more it will benefit. And should new projects remain unfunded, prices will remain high.

TMR: Speaking of media coverage of tungsten, Forbes in May noted that Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway have agreed to invest $80M in a South Korea project. What do you think of this, considering Buffett’s oracle status?

MS: The project is called Sangdong. It is owned by Woulfe Mining Corp. (WOF:TSX.V), which is headquartered in Vancouver and not to be confused with Wolf Minerals, which is an Australian company.

Sangdong published a DFS in 2012 but seems to have run into difficulties. There has been considerable turnover in senior management, three CEOs in 13 months, for instance. Although Buffett is looking at investing, it’s difficult to see what’s going on there. There have been no announcements about construction or anything like that. One would have thought Sangdong would be well along the development path by now.

TMR: Woulfe’s market cap is under $40M. Wouldn’t it just be easier for Berkshire Hathaway to buy the whole company?

MS: Somebody with Warren Buffett’s deep pockets could do that quite easily.

TMR: What is happening in Australia?

MS: Carbine Tungsten Ltd.’s (CNQ:ASX) Mt. Carbine project in Australia has an offtake agreement with Mitsubishi Corp. (MSBSHY:OTCPK). It is actually in production already, processing tailings.

TMR: How big is the project ultimately planned to be?

MS: Around 2.6 Kt tungsten metal per year—slightly bigger than Barruecopardo and slightly smaller than Hemerdon. If that succeeds, this would be a major project.

TMR: Are there any notable tungsten projects in North America? 

MS: North American Tungsten has a Yukon project even further north than CanTung. It’s called MacTung and the company published a feasibility study in 2009. It projects almost 6 Kt annual tungsten metal production, which is bigger than any of the other projects we’ve discussed, but initial capex is $402M.

Largo Resources Ltd. (LGO:TSX.V) has quite a big project in Yukon, just over the border with British Columbia, called Northern Dancer.

Northcliff Resources Ltd. (NCF:TSX.V) has the Sisson project in New Brunswick. It hopes to be in production by 2016 at around 4 Kt tungsten metal capacity per year. According to its January 2013 feasibility, Sisson has a $418M post-tax NPV, a 16.3% IRR and a 4.5-year payback period. Initial capex is $579M.

TMR: Northcliff has investment from Todd Corp. in New Zealand.

MS: Yes, and it is part of the HDI/Hunter Dickinson group of companies. It has a record of bringing mines into production. In the past, the junior mining company would do the initial resource work and prefeasibility study, possibly even up to the DFS, then the project would be sold to a bigger mining concern that would bring it into production. But that’s not happening in the current climate.

TMR: Isn’t it true that in recent years many junior mining companies have foundered after they overextended themselves attempting to bring projects to production?

MS: You’re right. But needs must, as they say. The juniors can’t sell their projects to larger mining companies because they are not interested. The larger companies are consolidating in precious metals, copper and so on, while leaving minor metals to the juniors.

TMR: Largo’s Northern Dancer has molybdenum, as well as tungsten. To what extent does a tungsten project with other metals make it more prospective?

MS: It depends on which other metals. Tungsten tends to occur on its own. Hemerdon has some tin but not very much. Sisson has molybdenum. This is a credit against the tungsten costs, so it can only help. But tungsten projects must be treated as such. If a company is relying on byproduct to get it over the line, that would be dangerous because if the byproduct price takes a dive, then it is left with a very marginally viable project, if that.

TMR: Which of the projects we’ve discussed seem most likely to succeed?

MS: Hemerdon is pretty likely to go ahead because it’s fully funded and in construction. Sisson looks to be a pretty good bet because it has HDI behind it, and Todd Corp. is invested in it. It is making good steady permitting progress but still needs financing and will not produce until 2016–2017, at the earliest.

TMR: What about other projects?

MS: Vital Metals Ltd. (VML:ASX) has the Watershed project, and Hazelwood Resources Ltd. (HAZ:ASX)the Cookes Creek project. Both are in Australia. Blackheath Resources Inc. (BHR:TSX.V) has the Covas project in Portugal.

Most tungsten projects have similar size, deposit grade and production costs. If only one besides Hemerdon were to go ahead, it would be difficult to say which one. It always comes down to funding, and that is obviously down to the bankers. Picking winners in this business is hard, which makes investing in mining projects that much more risky.

TMR: Let’s say that only one or two of these major tungsten projects begins producing in the next couple of years. So we have a tungsten shortage leading to a significant price increase. Then the financial institutions worry they’ve missed the boat, finance a bunch of projects, and we end up with a bubble. A possibility? 

MS: This is the problem. No market is run with perfect efficiency, and you do get cycles. It is quite possible we will see more volatility in tungsten prices in the next several years. To repeat, there doesn’t seem to be enough projects ready to begin production in the next five years to cope with the expected increase in demand and the exhaustion of CanTung.

The logical conclusion would be that tungsten prices will rise. Depending on how tight the market gets, that rise could be quite rapid. When tungsten prices got over $450/mtu for APT in mid-2011, this sparked interest in tungsten from those who were normally not interested in it.

TMR: We saw much the same with rare earths that year.

MS: When prices go crazy, everybody thinks, “We should be in REEs. Or tungsten.” Or whatever. If that leads to a whole slew of projects suddenly hitting the market at the same time, the pressure on prices would be inevitably downward. History shows that this is the way things tend to happen.

TMR: So we could see a collapse in tungsten prices?

MS: It is actually quite difficult to see a bust situation in tungsten because it’s quite difficult to see enough projects coming on to make prices crash. Prices could come down, but they should still be significantly higher than 10-15 years ago.

TMR: Mark, thank you for your time and your insights.

Mark Seddon has over 25 years of experience in the commodities industry. He is director of Tungsten Market Research Ltd. in London and was formerly managing director of Roskill Information Services and a sugar trader with Louis Dreyfus. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in European business administration from Middlesex University, as well as a Diplôme d’Études Supérieures Européennes de Management.

Want to read more Mining 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 The Mining Report homepage.

Related Articles

 

 

DISCLOSURE: 
1) Kevin Michael Grace 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: Carbine Tungsten Ltd. and Largo Resources Ltd. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.
3) Mark Seddon: 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 Bakken Gets Bigger—Likely A LOT Bigger

Just when you thought The Bakken couldn’t get any better—it does.

Oil producers are now “cracking the code” on the Torquay, or Three Forks formation below the Bakken, and coming up with incredible economics—these wells are paying back in only seven months.

This news has completely re-invigorated the Canadian side of the Bakken. And on the US side, the Three Forks is causing industry to leap-frog estimates of the amount of recoverable oil available–by about 57%!

It’s hard to imagine that the #1 oil play in all of North America could have such a huge increase in size—usually this happens in increments. This map from the Province of Manitoba shows how much potential the Torquay/Three Forks has—it ranges from 1.5 – 7 x as thick as the Bakken!

basin variability

Results from Crescent Point Energy (CPG-TSX/NYSE) in Canada and Continental Resources (CLR-NYSE) on the US side of the border are showing this could be an incredible discovery. The Torquay/Three Forks could prove to be another multi-billion barrel catch for the North American oilpatch.

Now when I say discovery; what I really mean is the industry has discovered how to produce from it profitably. The industry has known it’s potential for several years now.  But the Bakken source rock itself has been so prolific, there wasn’t much incentive to drill deeper and go through a new learning curve at the Three Forks.

On April 14 Crescent Point Energy (CPG-TSX) announced a Torquay discovery in its core Flat Lake area in southeast Saskatchewan, right along the US border. In just 12 months, the company grew production from 0 to over 5,000 boe/d by drilling 36 wells. These are low-decline, high-rate-of-return wells that payout in less than 7 months.

(A 7 month payback is incredible. It’s the simplest measurement for retail investors to know how good a play is. I like to see 12-15 month payouts, and don’t like to invest in plays that have more than 18 month payouts.)

CPG says each well costs $3.5 million all-in on a 1–mile horizontal. These well economics are fantastic:

1. More than $73/boe in operating netbacks (netback=profit per barrel)
2. A recycle ratio greater than 6–that’s profit divided by costs. That’s 6 times your money! 2 is good; 6 is great!
3 Generates an IRR > 300%. I like to invest in anything over 70% IRR.

CPG believes the Flat Lake Torquay discovery has the potential to match its core, Viewfield Bakken play in southeast Saskatchewan. The oil field is estimated to hold 4.6 billion bbls OOIP. torquay formation

This eye catching news triggered an acquisition spree; Crescent Point was the first mover with the acquisition of privately held CanEra Energy with 10,000 boe/d and a large Torquay land position only 10 days after its discovery announcement.

 well economics-1

Crescent Point’s acquisition locked in more than 880 net sections of Torquay potential land with more than 280 net sections in its delineated core area. The largest Bakken producer in Canada is positioning itself to become the number one Torquay player.

Legacy oil and gas (LEG-TSX) and Vermillion Energy (VET-TSX) have also made acquisitions of their own buying up privately held companies with land in the emerging play at Flat Lake—all at high metrics of over $100,000 per flowing barrel.

Production out of the Torquay/Three Forks has a lot more history on the US side of the border.

GEOLOGY BACKGROUND

The Bakken formation is located within the Williston Basin encompassing 25,000 square miles across southern Saskatchewan, upper Montana, upper North Dakota and western Manitoba. Unlocking this formation propelled North Dakota from the 9th largest oil producer in 2006 to no 2 behind Texas with more than 900,000 barrels of oil per day.

stratigraphic column 

The Bakken formation is actually three layers of rock—Upper, Middle and Lower–and is situated above theTorquay/Three Forks. The underlying Torquay actually has four layers of tight rock identified as TF1 (upper layer), TF2, TF3 and TF4 (deepest layer).

Last year, the US Geological Service (USGC) updated its assessment to include the upper part of the Torquay, about 50 feet in thickness. For the two formations, the US Geological Service USGS estimates mean recoverable oil resources of 7.38 billion barrels. Estimates for the Torquay account for 3.7 billion bbl.

These estimates seem very conservative to Continental Resources; the largest acreage holder in the Bakken is more optimistic about the total amount of oil that could ultimately be recovered.

In its own assessment, Continental believes that including the deeper parts of the Three Forks increases the total amount of oil originally in place (OOIP) from 577 billion barrels of oil to 903 billion, and the amount that is technically recoverable from 20 billion barrels to as much as 32 billion, 36 billion or even 45 billion.

tight oil plays

Only the upper layer (TF1) of the Torquay has been de-risked leaving the remaining 3 layers up for exploration. Continental has a pretty good reason to be optimistic. The company got impressive IP rates from drilling into the lower layers of the Torquay/Three Forks formation in McKenzie Country, North Dakota.

In its Q1 release, the company reported drilling eight new wells (two in each of the MB, TF1, TF2 and TF3) with a combined maximum 24-hour initial rate of 22,460 Boe per day or 2,810 Boe per day per well.

 rollefstad

Continental also reported that seven newly completed TF2 and TF3 initially produced at approximately 285 Boe per day in its Tragsrud Unit in Divide County, ND. That’s right across the border from the Flat Lake area.

For Continental the play is simply getting bigger and better. But despite these successes, the Torquay remains largely unexplored. Continental barely scratched the surface of this play as more wells will be needed to test the deeper layers of the formation.

For all this positive news, it’s important for investors to remember that the Torquay/Three Forks is still in its early stages and different areas and formations may respond differently. The Torquay is as much as 270 feet thick in the central part of the basin.

In Canada, the formation is shallower but with similar thickness. This translates into lower drilling & completion costs per well than the other side of the border.

The Torquay is heating up with the potential for being the next big light oil resource play. The size of the prize is just too big to ignore and bodes well for other smaller players in southeast Saskatchewan like Painted Pony (PPY-TSX) Spartan Energy (SPE-TSX), Legacy Oil and Gas (LEG-TSX), TORC OIL & GAS (TOG-TSX), Surge Energy (SGY-TSX), Vermillion Energy (VET-TSX) and Lightstream Resources (LTS-TSX).

In the US, companies like Amazing Eagle Energy (AMZG-OTCBB), Emerald Oil (EOX-NASD) and Triangle Petroleum (TPLM-NASD) stand to benefit from Torquay/Three Forks development.

To conclude, the Bakken was the hottest oil play in North America last decade. Investors made fortunes with the Bakken in its early years and a similar investment scenario may now unfold as the Torquay/Three Forks zone gets increasingly tested in the coming months. 

PS–for small producers, payback times for a well really matter.  I’ve found a producer whose core play has wells that often pay out in just six months–and don’t decline much at all! They are growing production and cash flow quickly, without growing the number of shares out.  That’s the leverage I like.   And it’s starting to perform. Click here to learn why I like this company so much.