September 29, 2011.....................................................(comments)
Bob Brinker's guest-speaker last Sunday was Charlie Maxwell. David Korn, who has written a weekly summary of Bob Brinker's Moneytalk for over a decade, has graciously given me permission to post his summary of Charlie Maxwell's Moneytalk interview.
David Korn wrote the following, including editorial comments:
MONEYTALK GUEST – CHARLES MAXWELL
Introduction: Bob had on one of his favorite guests, Charlie
Maxwell, Senior Energy Analyst for Weedon & Co. Charlie was
educated at Princeton and then Oxford. He has been working in the oil
industry since the 1950s. In the 1960s he became an analyst on Wall
Street and has been rated the #1 energy and oil analyst on many
occasions. Bob heaped heavy praise on Charlie as the best of the best
in terms of energy analysts and mandatory listening for Moneytalk
trekkies. Bob also congratulated Charlie on receiving the M. King
Hubbert E3 Ward for Excellence in Energy Education at the 2007 ASPO
World Oil Conference. I summarized the interview below.
Brinker/Maxwell: Bob asked Charlie his thoughts on the collapse
of the solar-electric company Solyndra. Charlie says it is important
that government step in and help at the early stage in new technologies.
China is doing that allowing them to do preliminary research that
doesn’t produce revenue and get them over the hurdles of the early days
of the industry when there are little profits to have. Our government
has been remiss in not helping much. They don’t have to give money,
they can lend them money and check on them. President Obama with a good
thought in his mind and trying to help America went ahead to push solar
power. The problem is he doesn’t select companies or gives them the
money and his underlings let him down by picking a loser who had a new
and controversial type of solar power that they thought would be cheaper
but turned out to be much more expensive and they couldn’t sell what
they have made. They should have pulled back from their help but they
didn’t because they were told by the company that everything was all
right and just needed time. They weren’t analyzed carefully by the
government and now a bad name has been given to the industry and to
President Obama for helping. It shows you can’t just throw money at
problems, you have to monitor and evaluate and follow up.
EC: Solyndra was a manufacturer of solar cells and last year was
promoted as a model for government investing in green technology. A
$535 million loan guarantee was applied for under the Bush
administration but was denied, but later granted under the Obama
administration and private investors also invested more than $1 billion
in the company. Early last month, the company ceased all business
activity filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and laid off all employees
suspended all of its operations last month leaving behind the United
States government as its largest creditor.
Brinker/Maxwell: There is a lot of volatility in oil prices. What
do you see ahead? Charlie says there is almost nothing that can stop a
longer-term rise in oil prices because oil is the most attractive
energy supply. It is easy to transport. It is powerful as a fuel. And
we have been using it like crazy for 150 years. We have now reached a
point where we are producing 88 million barrels a day and the earth is
saying how can I continue to grow this much. Getting the production
going has been a real problem. In 5 years we will probably reach a
plateau and at some point we won’t have additional barrels and the
price will go up and we will have to ration oil for those who don’t have
the money to pay for the higher rates.
EC: Charlie is on record stating that agrees with the viewpoint of
the renown Shell geologist, Dr. Marion King Hubbert, who predicted that
the world oil production would reach a peak and then rapidly decline.
Hubbert said the amount of oil given to our planet when it was formed
is finite. When an individual field has produced 50% of its oil, you
cannot force it to produce more oil on a daily basis. Charlie thinks
the we are not far away from when more countries have declining
production versus those that have rising production.
Brinker/Maxwell: Bob said we are sitting on incredible reserves
of natural gas and many have implored the President to start a program
that would require all federal vehicles to use natural gas which would
jump start this program. Charlie agreed that he has not picked up the
ball on this issue. We have problems with coal because of greenhouse
gases (and he thinks we will have to reduce it); we are running short of
oil, and we have the problems with nuclear energy now other countries
saying no to nuclear following what happened in Japan. (Charlie thinks
we will come back to nuclear in 20-30 years but it has been terribly
delayed by the issues in Japan). And here we have natural gas which
produces less waste than coal or oil. In the US, we have a surplus in
gas and the price has dropped in half over the last five years so it
makes sense to increase our reliance on it. We should have growth of
4-5% a year, but instead it is 2% a year and the government is not
sponsoring it. Why not? The environmentalists are a big factor. They
want to get rid of the fossil fuels (Charlie says we all do), but they
fuel 80% of our energy and so we can’t get rid of it immediately. Solar
and wind just won’t cut it right now because they account for a very
small percent of our energy and are expensive sources and take a long
time to develop the capital equipment. What we have available is fossil
fuels. So if we are going to be forced to use less oil and we want to
use less coal, let’s go with natural gas. Let’s use it for more
transportation purposes where oil dominates.
EC: Last time Charlie was on the show, Bob had asked him to comment
on whether hydrogen would ever play an important role in our energy
supply. Charlie said he thinks it will in 40- 50 years because hydrogen
is the most plentiful element on the planet. Charlie also pointed out
that he problem is that Hydrogen bonds so easily and powerfully on a
molecular level with other elements that it requires a lot of energy to
unbind it and, therefore, getting pure hydrogen is therefore expensive,
and it costs money to transport and store.
Brinker/Maxwell: Bob noted that Wind and solar energy only amounts
to less than 2% of our energy yet there seems to be a huge lack of
federal sponsorship for natural gas. Charlie says it is a political
issue. There is a battle between maintaining our standard of living and
the ideology of the environmental movement. Charlie said we are
finding out new ways of opening source rocks that we have known about
for a long time but could never open. Using new cracking techniques
with sand, we are getting lots more gas than we ever suspected we would.
We are going to have a lot more natural gas which can be converted to
liquid form so many big trucks and buses can use it as well as for
marine applications. It can be compressed or put in a liquid by
cooling. All of that will allow us to move to a natural gas economy over
time.
Brinker/Maxwell: There is a lot in the headlines about a move
against the oil companies and the White House is talking about raising
their tax bill. What is your view? Charlie said we need to do
something if oil is going to reach a peak in the next 5-10 years. We
need energy efficiency. However, we could use help to get a little more
oil than we might otherwise get if we don’t make a real effort. What
we have seen so far is the President comes up with a good idea like
increasing car miles per gallon, but then he slams the energy companies
by taking away the means to do it. We have a government that wants to
punish the oil companies for their success, but on the other hand needs
the oil companies since the government can’t do it itself. The result is
that we are not making the strides we need relative to our energy
policy. We need leadership on this issue otherwise we will have big
problems 7-10 years down the road.
Brinker/Maxwell: Should we be drilling for more oil in the United
States? Charlie said every barrel we can save or can substitute for oil
we should. We need to cut down on the imports and increase the value
of the dollar by not spending so many dollars on these imports. We are
very vulnerable to being cut off from imports. We need to create greater
efficiency and finding more oil where we can. Charlie said we will
never find enough oil in the United States to meet our needs. It will
never get back to the glory days of the late 1960s. But we can develop
some additional supplies and every barrel we do it will cut back our
reliance on some of the very countries that are using that money to fuel
terrorism. Charlie said they can just give the oil companies a level
playing field by removing some of the paperwork and ways that don’t
involve tax breaks.
Brinker/Maxwell: Are there any areas that are potential drilling
regions in the country that you would be taking a serious look at if
you were in charge? Charlie said Alaska has areas that have never been
tapped that have substantial amounts. The other is area is the Gulf
Coast where there is a lot of oil and and we have found new sources of
oil and gas.
Caller: Don’t we have tons of oil in our country that we just
haven’t found yet? Charlie said we found oil in 1859 for the first time
and we have been producing more and more since them. There has only
been 5 or 6 years that production has been down. Then came Hubbard in
1956 and said this will last until the early 1970s then we will go over
the peak. Then in November 1970, oil production peaked. He was
absolutely right and we have been in a downward course of production
from 1970 through today. At that point we were the only country
progressing downward in oil production but now there are 13 other
countries including Russia that have a downward production and so this
is a very well accepted theory around the world. Soon the whole world
will peak, probably in the late teens.
EC: David Strahan has written a book called, "The Last Oil
Shock." In that book, he writes, "There are currently 98 oil producing
countries in the world, of which 64 are thought to have passed their
geologically imposed production peak, and of those 60 are in terminal
production decline." Learn more about that book at the hubbert peak web
site at this url:
www.hubbertspeak.com
Brinker/Maxwell: Bob asked Charlie to comment on China as it
relates to energy. Charlie said 70% of their energy is derived from
coal and they don’t have the administrative restrictions that we do so
it is blasting out into the world and polluting the sky and air. We are
all breathing air that has been polluted in China. We are working with
the Chinese, but they will probably not cut back on their economic
growth and so they will probably keep up their coal use. It is the
cheapest source for electricity. That is a long term problem that we
can’t solve since it is not an American problem. On the other side, we
should be sponsoring a lot more natural gas. The Chinese have natural
gas and they can easily import it through pipeline from a number of
countries in Europe and Asia. We should be helping them do that. They
can also import it in liquefied form.
Caller: This caller has been following the building of wind
towers in Illinois. The caller wanted to know what rate of capacity
they are putting out because he read a report that they are spending a
lot of money without getting much bang for the buck. Charlie said he
is afraid that he is right. Although he can’t speak to the wind farms
in Illinois, when you hear someone say you get 70-80% capacity when the
wind is continuously flowing they are right; however, wind doesn’t
continuously flow and during hot spells you have to fire up the coal
production as a back up to the wind farm. It means you have to build the
equipment even if you don’t use it. This is being sold to the American
public as a real answer and it is not a real answer. It is pretty close
to break even in terms of making a profit bur we need to look
elsewhere. Photovoltaics will take over wind as a better long-term
energy solution.
EC: Photovoltaics generates electric power by converting solar
radiation into direct current electricity using semiconductors that
exhibit the photovoltaic effect. Try saying that five times fast.
David
Korn's Stock Market Commentary, Interpretation of Moneytalk (Bob
Brinker Host), Financial Education, Helpful Links, Guest Editorials, and
Special Alert E-Mail Service. Copyright David Korn, L.L.C. 2011
Honey here: If you would like to have a complimentary issue of David's weekly newsletter, or The Retirement Advisor that he co-publishes with Kirk Lindstrom, there are links to both here: David Korn's newsletters (look in the right column under "Related Links").
16 comments:
SJ_Al sent me this funny video about a cat and a mouse (about one minute, but you will LOL).
Simon’s Cat in ‘Cat & Mouse’ is exactly why my two cats are banned from my office.
Bob Brinker's latest economic prediction is for 1 to 2% growth. ECRI claims the US is "tipping" back into recession. Latest Businesscycle.com report:
Sep30
U.S. Economy Tipping into Recession
Early last week, ECRI notified clients that the U.S. economy is indeed tipping into a new recession. And there’s nothing that policy makers can do to head it off.
ECRI’s recession call isn’t based on just one or two leading indexes, but on dozens of specialized leading indexes, including the U.S. Long Leading Index, which was the first to turn down – before the Arab Spring and Japanese earthquake – to be followed by downturns in the Weekly Leading Index and other shorter-leading indexes. In fact, the most reliable forward-looking indicators are now collectively behaving as they did on the cusp of full-blown recessions, not “soft landings.”
Last year, amid the double-dip hysteria, we definitively ruled out an imminent recession based on leading indexes that began to turn up before QE2 was announced. Today, the key is that cyclical weakness is spreading widely from economic indicator to indicator in a telltale recessionary fashion.
Why should ECRI’s recession call be heeded? Perhaps because, as The Economist has noted, we’ve correctly called three recessions without any false alarms in-between. In contrast, most of those who’ve accurately predicted a recession or two have also been guilty of crying wolf – in 2010, 2005, 2003, 1998, 1995, or 1987.
A new recession isn’t simply a statistical event. It’s a vicious cycle that, once started, must run its course. Under certain circumstances, a drop in sales, for instance, lowers production, which results in declining employment and income, which in turn weakens sales further, all the while spreading like wildfire from industry to industry, region to region, and indicator to indicator. That’s what a recession is all about.
But how can we have a new recession just a couple of years after the last one officially ended? Isn’t this too short for an economic expansion?
(SNIP)
It’s important to understand that recession doesn’t mean a bad economy – we’ve had that for years now. It means an economy that keeps worsening, because it’s locked into a vicious cycle. It means that the jobless rate, already above 9%, will go much higher, and the federal budget deficit, already above a trillion dollars, will soar.
Here’s what ECRI’s recession call really says: if you think this is a bad economy, you haven’t seen anything yet. And that has profound implications for both Main Street and Wall Street."
Read more: U.S. Economy Tipping into Recession
Is this the "backing and filling" that Bob Brinker spoke about in his September 22nd bulletin?
Right now, we are still above his buy level of S&P 500 Index 1129. No doubt, he is hoping that will hold. Will it? I sure hope so, but not convinced it will.
That said, Brinker's target range for the S&P has been mid-1400's for several months now. However, a couple of months ago, he extended the time frame for that prediction into 2012.
.
In the April 1 2003 Kiplinger article:
(Bob) Brinker predicts market timing, in general, will be more valuable in the future. "The buy and hold days are over" he proclaims.
And what has been Mr B been doing in the over eight years since?
Altogether on three...1..2..3
BUYING AND HOLDING
That is a pretty bold call by ECRI. I think they will join the ranks of those who cried wolf. Their ECRI growth indicator is influenced by what happens in the stock market. The bet is that Europe behind the scenes is committed to solving their sovereign debt issues. The uncertainty regarding this is the only thing keeping the market down IMO. Earnings will continue to be good going forward.
If Obama and Congress can work two issues Simpson Boles long term debt solution and resolving to get off foreign oil using Nat. Gas as the bridge fuel - with Nat Gas position limits and high spec. only margins of 50 to 99% to insure supply/demand equation is not skewed by speculators.
A third issue to move this Country forward is tax simplification and loop hole closing but I think that is in Simpson Boles.
The final thing needed is mortgage refi. simplification and revamping - new rules - if you will that allow those who are under water but are consistently paying their mortgage to refi. and take advantage of the Bernanke twist operation. Other ideas out there too re: mass refi. simplification.
The above are things which should be common ground to Republicans, Democrats, & Independents.
Will any of the above happen? It is such low hanging fruit I would be surprised if they did not grab it. Stay tuned.
By def. a recession is 2 consecutive qtrs. of negative GDP growth - ain't happening unless Eurozone implodes and they do not act - which they will.
+ if you comp. the 2nd derivative of EGRI growth this year to last it is nowhere near as bad as last yr.
My 2 cents FWIW - I said the same thing here at the beginning of Sept.
Too bad nobody ask Charlie's opinion of Bob Brinker's stock pick in the oil industry. Bob selected Suncor (SU) selling at about $30 at the time. I think it got up to around $48 earlier this year. Now I believe it is sell around $26. I think it is a buy at this level.
ECRI’s recession call says: if you think this is a bad economy, you haven’t seen anything yet. And that has profound implications for both Main Street and Wall Street.
http://www.businesscycle.com/reports_indexes/reportsummarydetails/1091
Eqw334
EQW334,
Save yourself some time and read the comments before you post. I already posted about ECRI's recession article link and Smile has discussed the subject, too.
Ok Ok... who's taking bets on whether the Brinkster will have a guest host on this Sunday? :) What with the market finishing at or near his last week Bull_etin all in MOABO.
I still think we need to test that 1100 level - if we fail - Katy bar the door - look out below.
I'm still scaling in but leaving some dry powder for test probes... be careful :)
Wonders never cease. I won the daily market-timing contest and ended the month with the largest trading account.
Like I said, I wish I could do it in real life, but it's different with real money for some reason. :)
Silicon Investor Market Guru of the Month Contest
Actually, I should have said that I tied for first place, which is good, I still have something to shoot for. LOL!
.
Smile:
Isn't it time for Lynn this weekend?
That would give him the next 3 weekends in Oct, then the last weekend off, to get his costume ready for Halloween.
-- Frankj
birdbrain said:
In the April 1 2003 Kiplinger article:
(Bob) Brinker predicts market timing, in general, will be more valuable in the future. "The buy and hold days are over" he proclaims.
And what has been Mr B been doing in the over eight years since?
Altogether on three...1..2..3
BUYING AND HOLDING
Thanks for showing us that great quote from Brinker in 2003. It reminds us how he does not practice what he preaches. Remember when the secular bear market began in 2000 he told us that buy and holders will become frustrated during secular bears because they won't make any money?
He said only a marketimer such as himself will make money by being in the market during bull markets and go to cash during bear markets. He said he will go 100% cash if he expects a bear and might even go short if the opportunity arises.
So here we are 11 years later and as you said he has been a buy and holder for the last 8. If fact he has had at least a portion of his portfolio in the market all 11 years. Around 2005-06 he even became confused about whether or not we were in a secular bear.
We may find out as early as next week if Brinker's latest call has any merit. If anyone on Wall Street has heard of Bob Brinker and knows his views they will be in there buying the market on Monday morning.
Honey wrote:
Wonders never cease. I won the daily market-timing contest and ended the month with the largest trading account.
Congrats on your fine September. Looks like we may have found a new host of Moneytalk when Brinker retires. LOL
If not, your fine forecasting gives us yet another reason to read this blog.
Thank you Jim. I think it would be a lot of fun to host Moneytalk for Brinker when he takes his much-needed vacations. LOL!
And I promise not to yell "WELCOME! WELCOME!" into the microphone. :)
FrankJ,
I agree, it's about time for Bob to take another vacation from his three hour weekly job. That market looks pretty dicey right now. :)
Although in fairness, the S&P is still 2 points above his 1129 buy-signal.
Post a Comment