Seeking Alpha

Michael Fitzsim...'s  Instablog

Michael Fitzsimmons
  • on Utilities
Send Message
I focus on investments in the oil & gas sector with an eye for dividend income and long-term capital appreciation. I typically allocate a portion of my own portfolio and devote some of my Seeking Alpha articles to small and medium sized companies offering compelling risk/reward propositions.... More
My company:
Independent Investor
My blog:
The Fitzman
  • A Natural Gas "OPEC"? It Will Never Happen 2 comments
    Apr 20, 2010 11:45 AM
    Major natural gas exporter Algeria recently lobbied for OPEC style production cuts in hopes to address the global supply glut and raise weak natural gas spot prices. Is a natural gas equivalent of OPEC in the cards? Not in your lifetime.

    The problem Algeria faces is quite simple: the world is awash in natural gas. Huge natural gas supply is now, and will be coming on stream, from all over the world: Australia's coal seam gas, StatOil's (NYSE:STO) Snohvit LNG project  http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article212423.ece , ExxonMobil's (NYSE:XOM) huge LNG project in Qatar
    http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/news_features_20081231_qatar_lng.aspx
    , as well as Iranian and Russian supply just to name a few examples. Best of all for United States are the prolific American shale plays and the technology needed to economically bring that shale gas to market. This is the wonderful news about natural gas: there is no possibility of an OPEC style cartel to control prices because the world has a very diverse set of suppliers. It is because of this abundance of supply and because of large LNG capabilities coming on-line which will enable world-wide delivery of natural gas that prices will remain low for decades into the future.

    As I have written on Seeking Alpha before: I believe the historical oil-to-natural gas ratio has been changed forever. The ratio is currently over 20, about double the average since 1995 (9). Many natural gas consuming countries have made a huge mistake by linking natural gas contracts to on oil-index. This is a huge error and shows a basic misunderstanding of the fundamentals of oil and natural gas economics. In the coming years, worldwide oil supply will have much difficulty keeping up with worldwide oil demand while the exact opposite is true of worldwide natural gas supply and demand, It doesn't take a rocket scientist (let alone an economist...) to figure out this means higher prices for oil and low and stable prices for natural gas.

    Yet the biggest error in judgment has been made by U.S. economists and energy policy "experts" like Energy Secretary Chu. Despite huge staffs of highly paid "professionals", these folks have been unable to figure out the energy basics described above. Their inability to figure things out is mystifying considering 2008's $145/barrel high, current oil prices over $80/barrel, and natural gas going for $4/Mcf. So what's their problem? Since the economics are obvious, natural gas is cleaner, and the supply is domestic(!), the problem must be political. How sad is that? As a result, legislation like HR 1835 remains moth-balled in Congress and the obvious solution to the economic, environmental, and national security issues America faces as a result of its addiction to foreign oil (natural gas transportation), has not been adopted. Worse still, the oil crisis we have experienced and still face has not resulted in an American strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy like this:
    http://thefitzman.blogspot.com/2008/08/strategic-long-term-comprehensive-us.html

    In spite of these serious lapses in energy policy, no one (other than me) seems to be calling for Energy Secretary Chu to resign. He should do so - preferably today.

    What does this mean for investors? Obviously my take is that the American economy will again be racked by much higher oil prices and gasoline prices. Logically then, an investor should have significant exposure to oil investments while at the same time being out of broad market investments like the S&P500. While smaller oil producers highly leveraged to oil prices and more likely to be bought out are perhaps the best way to play it, I also like the large oil producers that pay nice dividends: StatOil (STO), BP, Chevron (NYSE:CVX) and Conoco Philips (NYSE:COP) come to mind. Occidental Petroleum (NYSE:OXY) is more highly levered to oil prices than any of these and deserves consideration albeit its devidend is less attractive. A more speculative stock is Brazilian company Petrobras (NYSE:PBR). However, the proven large reserves will mean the biggest increases in oil production of all the previously mentioned companies. For this reason, PBR is worth the risk. Buy PBR anywhere below $45/share and you won't be sorry 3-5 years from now.

    Disclosure: Long BP, COP, PBR, STO
Back To Michael Fitzsimmons' Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (2)
Track new comments
  • NickP.
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Fascinating! Wondering why good old USA ingenuity hasn't produced a decent little auto such as the Suzuki Samurai or an equivalent with NG/Lithium power train. Seems odd that the private sector is not stepping up to the golden opportunity? Unless of course fear of GOV/Reprisal would be to large an intimidation factor. Any how having just found your sight I think I'll add you to the nightly enlightenment hour here at home. thx/Nick P.
    27 Apr 2010, 06:42 AM Reply Like
  • Michael Fitzsimmons
    , contributor
    Comments (8293) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » hi nick: as far as i know there are three main reasons the USA hasn't adopted natural gas transportation:

     

    1) the coal interest own congress (and obama and chu) and therefore the transportation "architecture" of choice is electric cars recharged by dirty, expensive, and polluting coal

     

    2) the pro-jewish policymakers that dominant American economic policy want the USA to stay addicted to Arab oil so that our military is planted in the middle east to protect Israel. (the strategy is working insofar keeping our military over there, but the strategy is deeply flawed because it is:
    a) enriching the arab oil producers beyond belief
    b) causing huge fiscal and monetary deficits in the USA causing
    the Fed and Treasury to print fiat paper dollars backed by
    nothing
    c) weakening Israel's sole protector: the USA

     

    3) the US government (via the EPA and other agencies) are not supportive of natural gas vehicles and refueling stations. GM and Ford both make NGVs and sell them all around the world, just not here.

     

    it's a sad, sad, state of affairs. buy yourself some oil stocks and hold on for the next oil price spike and the eventual economic chaos coming here in the USA as a consequence.
    27 Apr 2010, 08:33 AM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

StockTalks

More »

Latest Comments


Most Commented
  1. How I Retired At 45 (61 Comments)
  2. The Big Picture (22 Comments)
  3. John Hess' comments in Copenhagen (16 Comments)
  4. It's Going to Get Ugly (11 Comments)
  5. August Foreign Oil Bill (8 Comments)
Posts by Themes
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.