Mar 4, 2011

Why the Dollar's Reign Is Near an End

The single most astonishing fact about foreign exchange is not the high volume of transactions, as incredible as that growth has been. Nor is it the volatility of currency rates, as wild as the markets are these days.  Instead, it's the extent to which the market remains dollar-centric.

Consider this: When a South Korean wine wholesaler wants to import Chilean cabernet, the Korean importer buys U.S. dollars, not pesos, with which to pay the Chilean exporter. Indeed, the dollar is virtually the exclusive vehicle for foreign-exchange transactions between Chile and Korea, despite the fact that less than 20% of the merchandise trade of both countries is with the U.S.

Chile and Korea are hardly an anomaly: Fully 85% of foreign-exchange transactions world-wide are trades of other currencies for dollars. What's more, what is true of foreign-exchange transactions is true of other international business. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries sets the price of oil in dollars. The dollar is the currency of denomination of half of all international debt securities. More than 60% of the foreign reserves of central banks and governments are in dollars.

The greenback, in other words, is not just America's currency. It's the world's.
But as astonishing as that is, what may be even more astonishing is this: The dollar's reign is coming to an end.

I believe that over the next 10 years, we're going to see a profound shift toward a world in which several currencies compete for dominance.

The impact of such a shift will be equally profound, with implications for, among other things, the stability of exchange rates, the stability of financial markets, the ease with which the U.S. will be able to finance budget and current-account deficits, and whether the Fed can follow a policy of benign neglect toward the dollar.

The Three Pillars
How could this be? How could the dollar's longtime most-favored-currency status be in jeopardy?

To understand the dollar's future, it's important to understand the dollar's past—why the dollar became so dominant in the first place. Let me offer three reasons.

First, its allure reflects the singular depth of markets in dollar-denominated debt securities. The sheer scale of those markets allows dealers to offer low bid-ask spreads. The availability of derivative instruments with which to hedge dollar exchange-rate risk is unsurpassed. This makes the dollar the most convenient currency in which to do business for corporations, central banks and governments alike.

Second, there is the fact that the dollar is the world's safe haven. In crises, investors instinctively flock to it, as they did following the 2008 failure of Lehman Brothers. This tendency reflects the exceptional liquidity of markets in dollar instruments, liquidity being the most precious of all commodities in a crisis. It is a product of the fact that U.S. Treasury securities, the single most important asset bought and sold by international investors, have long had a reputation for stability.

Finally, the dollar benefits from a dearth of alternatives. Other countries that have long enjoyed a reputation for stability, such as Switzerland, or that have recently acquired one, like Australia, are too small for their currencies to account for more than a tiny fraction of international financial transactions.
What's Changing
But just because this has been true in the past doesn't guarantee that it will be true in the future. In fact, all three pillars supporting the dollar's international dominance are eroding.

First, changes in technology are undermining the dollar's monopoly. Not so long ago, there may have been room in the world for only one true international currency. Given the difficulty of comparing prices in different currencies, it made sense for exporters, importers and bond issuers all to quote their prices and invoice their transactions in dollars, if only to avoid confusing their customers.

Now, however, nearly everyone carries hand-held devices that can be used to compare prices in different currencies in real time. Just as we have learned that in a world of open networks there is room for more than one operating system for personal computers, there is room in the global economic and financial system for more than one international currency.

Second, the dollar is about to have real rivals in the international sphere for the first time in 50 years. There will soon be two viable alternatives, in the form of the euro and China's yuan.
Americans especially tend to discount the staying power of the euro, but it isn't going anywhere. Contrary to some predictions, European governments have not abandoned it. Nor will they. They will proceed with long-term deficit reduction, something about which they have shown more resolve than the U.S. And they will issue "e-bonds"—bonds backed by the full faith and credit of euro-area governments as a group—as a step in solving their crisis. This will lay the groundwork for the kind of integrated European bond market needed to create an alternative to U.S. Treasurys as a form in which to hold central-bank reserves.

China, meanwhile, is moving rapidly to internationalize the yuan, also known as the renminbi. The last year has seen a quadrupling of the share of bank deposits in Hong Kong denominated in yuan. Seventy thousand Chinese companies are now doing their cross-border settlements in yuan. Dozens of foreign companies have issued yuan-denominated "dim sum" bonds in Hong Kong. In January the Bank of China began offering yuan-deposit accounts in New York insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Allowing Chinese companies to do cross-border settlements in yuan will free them from having to undertake costly foreign-exchange transactions. They will no longer have to bear the exchange-rate risk created by the fact that their revenues are in dollars but many of their costs are in yuan. Allowing Chinese banks, for their part, to do international transactions in yuan will allow them to grab a bigger slice of the global financial pie.

Admittedly, China has a long way to go in building liquid markets and making its financial instruments attractive to international investors. But doing so is central to Beijing's economic strategy. Chinese officials have set 2020 as the deadline for transforming Shanghai into a first-class international financial center. We Westerners have underestimated China before. We should not make the same mistake again.

Finally, there is the danger that the dollar's safe-haven status will be lost. Foreign investors—private and official alike—hold dollars not simply because they are liquid but because they are secure. The U.S. government has a history of honoring its obligations, and it has always had the fiscal capacity to do so.

But now, mainly as a result of the financial crisis, federal debt is approaching 75% of U.S. gross domestic product. Trillion-dollar deficits stretch as far as the eye can see. And as the burden of debt service grows heavier, questions will be asked about whether the U.S. intends to maintain the value of its debts or might resort to inflating them away. Foreign investors will be reluctant to put all their eggs in the dollar basket. At a minimum, the dollar will have to share its safe-haven status with other currencies.
A World More Complicated
How much difference will all this make—to markets, to companies, to households, to governments?
[DOLLAR JUMP]
One obvious change will be to the foreign-exchange markets. There will no longer be an automatic jump up in the value of the dollar, and corresponding decline in the value of other major currencies, when financial volatility surges. With the dollar, euro and yuan all trading in liquid markets and all seen as safe havens, there will be movement into all three of them in periods of financial distress. No one currency will rise as strongly as did the dollar following the failure of Lehman Bros. There will be no reason for the rates between them to move sharply, something that would potentially upend investors.

But the impact will extend well beyond the markets. Clearly, the change will make life more complicated for U.S. companies. Until now they have had the convenience of using the same currency—dollars—whether they are paying their workers, importing parts and components, or selling their products to foreign customers. They don't have to incur the cost of changing foreign-currency earnings into dollars. They don't have to purchase forward contracts and options to protect against financial losses due to changes in the exchange rate. This will all change in the brave new world that is coming. American companies will have to cope with some of the same exchange-rate risks and exposures as their foreign competitors.

Conversely, life will become easier for European and Chinese banks and companies, which will be able to do more of their international business in their own currencies. The same will be true of companies in other countries that do most of their business with China or Europe. It will be a considerable convenience—and competitive advantage—for them to be able to do that business in yuan or euros rather than having to go through the dollar.
U.S. Impact
In this new monetary world, moreover, the U.S. government will not be able to finance its budget deficits so cheaply, since there will no longer be as big an appetite for U.S. Treasury securities on the part of foreign central banks.

Nor will the U.S. be able to run such large trade and current-account deficits, since financing them will become more expensive. Narrowing the current-account deficit will require exporting more, which will mean making U.S. goods more competitive on foreign markets. That in turn means that the dollar will have to fall on foreign-exchange markets—helping U.S. exporters and hurting those companies that export to the U.S.

My calculations suggest that the dollar will have to fall by roughly 20%. Because the prices of imported goods will rise in the U.S., living standards will be reduced by about 1.5% of GDP—$225 billion in today's dollars. That is the equivalent to a half-year of normal economic growth. While this is not an economic disaster, Americans will definitely feel it in the wallet.
On the other hand, the next time the U.S. has a real-estate bubble, we won't have the Chinese helping us blow it.
 
Dr. Eichengreen is the George C. Pardee and Helen N. Pardee professor of economics and political science at the University of California, Berkeley. His new book is "Exorbitant Privilege: The Rise and Fall of the Dollar and the Future of the International Monetary System." He can be reached at reports@wsj.com.




Mar 3, 2011

The Natural Gas Comeback of 2011

Posted by Wealth Wire - Wednesday, March 2nd, 2011
Guest post by Keith Kohl of Energy and Capital.


You've probably been told — warned, even — that natural gas may be one of the last places you should put your hard-earned money...

I've been told the same thing.

They say the natural gas markets are dead, that there's no hope in sight for decades to come. They liken natural gas profits to seeing pink elephants — something only witnessed after you've had your head in a pail of Natty Boh.

Sure enough, one quick glance at stagnant price charts, and there's a chance you might take those warnings to heart.

Who's to argue?
Flat prices have been commonplace during the last few years:

nat gas 3 year price chart


But where most of the herd tends to panic, others see potential...

The natural gas price problem

For starters, the problem lies in the surge in shale gas plays across the United States.
For the sake of our newer readers, here's a good look at where the U.S. shale plays are located:
shale gas map

Furthermore, we have a lot of gas. According to the EIA, the United States has 2,552 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of potential natural gas resources. Approximately one-third of that resource (nearly 827 Tcf) is from shale formations.

Shale gas now makes up 14% of our domestic natural gas supply, but I'll get further into that detail in just a second.

Today, natural gas futures fell more than they have in three weeks. Not only is the winter heating season almost over, but production is also on the rise.


2011: The year of the natural gas comeback

There's no doubt that demand is back on the up and up.

According to EIA data, U.S. natural gas demand in 2010 was higher than ever. Our total consumption for that year reached 24.1 trillion cubic feet, a 5.6% year-over-year increase.
Consider the fact that we only produce about 27% of the oil we use. And we're all painfully aware of our country's addiction to foreign oil...

Natural gas is much different. Last year, we produced 87% of our demand domestically.
Although demand for natural gas goes primarily towards electric power and the industrial sector, there's also a wild card: the U.S. transportation sector.

Doesn't it make sense that our transition away from oil would come from natural gas?
Perhaps UPS adding 48 LNG-fueled heavy-duty trucks to their fleet is a sign of things to come. To date, the company has just under two thousand alternative technology vehicles — more than half of which use LNG for fuel.


Is it time to buy natural gas?

You might find it all too easy to dismiss natural gas plays. The price chart above might suggest there's not much to get excited about...

Natural gas has been shadowed by oil throughout the last few years.
Only two years after oil bottomed at $33/bbl, and we're once again staring down the barrel of $100 oil. Brent crude even hit $120 per barrel recently — just $27 shy of the WTI record set during the summer of 2008.

In fact, crude prices have jumped considerably higher, up more than 170% since 2009. I showed you earlier that oil drilling activity is ready to overtake natural gas.

Does that mean your natural gas investments have suffered a similar fate?
Far from it, actually.

Take a look at how some of those companies have been performing for investors:
natural gas stocks 3-1

The truth is these companies don't need $15/Mcf to thrive. And some companies are eying even bigger returns...

Range Resources (NYSE: RRC), for example, announced this week the company is selling off their Barnett Shale properties for $900 million. (That's roughly 20% of their total production.)

The sale will allow Range to focus on other plays with more potential, like the Marcellus Shale in the Appalachian region. Almost 90% of their 2011 budget is being spent on the Marcellus.

Those shale plays are going to play a major role in meeting future demand. As you can see below, the EIA expects shale gas to make up 45% of production by 2035:

us natural gas sources

Just imagine what will happen when natural gas prices start to rebound...
Later this week, I'm going to show you another hotbed of natural gas activity. And the best part is these natural gas investments are still flying under everyone's radar.

Feb 18, 2011

Shortages! Is The World Really Running Out Of Food, Water And Oil?



Everywhere you look today the mainstream news is talking about shortages. Authorities all over the globe are boldly proclaiming that the world is rapidly running out of food, water and oil. So are these doomsayers right? Well, it must be noted that some of the most famous "prophets of doom" of the past several decades have seen their predictions fail spectacularly. For example, in his infamous 1968 book entitled "The Population Bomb", Paul Ehrlich made the following statement: "I don't see how India could possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980."  Well, India is now feeding well over twice the number of people than they had when Ehrlich originally wrote his book.  But that doesn't mean that major shortages won't happen in the future.  It just means that we should be careful not to look incredibly ridiculous like Ehrlich did.  The truth is that there are good reasons why we should be watching global supplies of food, water and oil very closely.  Life as we know it would cease to exist if we had severe shortages of any of them.

So will we actually be facing serious shortages of food, water or oil in the coming years?
Well, let's take a look at oil first.

Oil Shortage?
Right now oil is absolutely essential to almost everything that we do.  We require oil to drive our cars, we require oil to produce our food, a large percentage of our homes use energy that is derived from oil and most of what we buy at the stores comes in packaging that is made up at least partly of oil.

So if we run out of oil that is going to be a really huge deal.

So are we going to run out of oil?
Well, right now advocates of the "peak oil" hypothesis are getting a lot of attention in the mainstream media.

Basically the idea behind "peak oil" is that the world has reached (or almost reached) the maximum amount of oil that it can produce and that from here on out the amount of oil that will be produced will begin to decline.  Meanwhile, the demand for oil is only going to continue to increase.

So is there evidence that this is actually happening?

Well, it depends on who you ask.  But what is undeniable is that there are some very powerful interests that are doing their best to hype a coming oil shortage. In recently released report entitled "Signals & Signposts", Shell Oil warns that global demand for energy is going to be three times as large in 2050 as it was in 2000.

So where will all of that extra energy come from?

Can the world possibly produce two or three times as much oil as it does today?

The Shell Oil report forecasts that the global supply of oil will continue to rise but that the rise in supply will not be fast enough to keep up with the rise in demand.  According to Shell, this is going to cause rapidly rising oil prices which will cause the gross domestic products of all nations to fall.

So just how high could oil prices go?

Well, the truth is that the price of oil is very highly manipulated.  The market for oil is not exactly what you would call a "free market".

However, it is alarming that almost everyone is forecasting much higher oil prices at this point.
For example, Weeden & Co. oil analyst Charles Maxwell recently stated that he believes that the price of oil will eventually hit $300 a barrel by the end of this decade.

If that were to happen, it would be absolutely disastrous for the global economy.  Yeah, those in the oil industry would make a killing, but for the rest of the world it would be a complete and utter nightmare.  Unfortunately, what most Americans don't understand is that there are lots of alternative energy technologies out there that have been repressed by the big oil companies and by the big oil producing nations because they threaten hundreds of billions of dollars in profits.

For example, did you know that it is possible to run a car entirely on water?  One Japanese company hopes to start mass marketing them....But I wouldn't count on seeing water-powered cars sold on every street corner any time soon. Why? Because of greed.

Our entire system of energy is based on making as much money as possible for those who have all the oil.  So if the world has a shortage of energy in the coming years, it is not because that is how it inevitably had to be.  Rather, it will be all about pure, unadulterated greed.

There are plenty of alternative energy technologies out there that are incredibly promising, but those that are getting incredibly wealthy off of our oil-based society are not going to quietly step aside for the good of mankind.

Food Shortage?

So what about food? Is the world running out of food?

Well, as we have seen so many times in the past, the earth can support far more people than most of the "experts" ever imagined.  In fact, if weather patterns were perfectly stable and we removed human greed out of the picture, the earth could most likely support a whole lot more people.

Unfortunately, weather patterns are becoming increasingly bizarre and human greed is always a problem.  In particular, this year extreme weather all over the globe is causing many to be concerned that we may soon see some very serious food shortages.  In Australia and Brazil, flooding of Biblical proportions has absolutely devastated crops.  Some of China's most important agricultural areas are experiencing the worst droughts that they have seen in 200 years.  Authorities are warning that two-thirds of China's wheat crop could be in danger.  A recent cold snap that hit northern Mexico wiped out entire harvests and has sent prices for many fresh produce items in the United States soaring.  But these bizarre weather patterns will hopefully settle down eventually.  What is of even greater concern is that we have been seeing a long-term trend of rapidly rising food prices over the last couple of years that is putting an extreme amount of strain on the 3 billion people in the world that are trying to survive on the equivalent of 2 dollars or less per day.

Most Americans can still handle rising food prices, but for millions upon millions of poor people all over the world a significant increase in the cost of food can mean the difference between life and death.  That is why the sudden rise in price of so many agricultural commodities is so disturbing.  Just consider some of the shocking price increases that we have seen over the past year or two....
*The price of corn has doubled over the last six months and recently hit a new all-time high.
*The price of wheat has more than doubled over the past year and hit a 30-month high on Monday.
*The price of soybeans is up about 50% since last June.
*The price of cotton has more than doubled over the past year.
*The commodity price of orange juice has doubled since 2009.
*The price of sugar is the highest it has been in 30 years.
If prices continue to go up like this we are going to see a lot more food riots all over the globe.
But perhaps that is what those in positions of power actually want.  The truth is that the global elite don't always have the best interests of the rest of us at heart.


Water Shortage?

So what about water? Is the world running out of water?

Well, yes, many areas of the world are rapidly running out of fresh water and this is perhaps one of the biggest problems we are facing.

Without oil, most of us could survive for quite some time.
Without food, most of us could survive for a number of weeks.
Without water, most of us would die within a matter of days.

Fortunately North America still has a decent supply of fresh water, but as I have written about previously, in many areas of the globe the situation is quickly becoming absolutely dire....
*Worldwide demand for fresh water tripled during the last century, and is now doubling every 21 years.
*According to USAID, one-third of all humans will face severe or chronic water shortages by the year 2025.
*Of the 60 million people added to the world’s cities every year, the vast majority of them live in impoverished slums and shanty-towns with no sanitation facilities whatsoever.
*It is estimated that 75 percent of India's surface water is now contaminated by human and agricultural waste.
*Not only that, but according to a UN study on sanitation, far more people in India have access to a mobile phone than to a toilet.
*In northern China, the water table is dropping one meter per year due to overpumping.
*But there are few places where the water shortage is as severe as it is in the Middle East.  

Saudi Arabia had been producing enough wheat to be self-sufficient for most of the past 30 years, but in 2008 authorities there realized that the non-replenishable aquifer they had been pumping for irrigation purposes was nearly depleted.  So in response Saudi Arabia made the decision to reduce their wheat harvest by one-eighth every year thereafter.  Wheat production in Saudi Arabia is scheduled to cease entirely in 2016.
In some of the most populated areas of the planet the water situation can only be described as catastrophic.

For example, did you know that a new desert the size of Rhode Island is created in China because of drought every single year?

Did you know that in China 80% of the major rivers are so polluted that they don't support aquatic life at all?

Did you know that the women of South Africa collectively walk the equivalent distance to the moon and back 16 times a day for water?

Thankfully the water situation in the United States has not gotten that bad yet, but the truth is that even we could be facing serious water shortages in the years ahead.

According to a recent report released by the Natural Resources Defense Council, more than one-third of all counties in the lower 48 states will likely be facing very serious water shortages by the year 2050.

So, yes, there are some really good reasons to be concerned about earth's dwindling resources.

If the global elite were not so incredibly greedy and if we managed our planet better we would not have problems to this degree.

But here we are.
So what is the solution?

Well, it would be really great if the global elite would just share some of their wealth.  A study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research discovered that the bottom half of the world population owns approximately 1 percent of all global wealth.

But the global elite aren't about to change the rules of the global economy.  After all, they spent a whole lot of time and effort rigging the game so that virtually all wealth eventually gets funneled into their hands.

Rather, most among the global elite seem to believe that radical population control is the answer.

After all, they argue, if there are half as many people around then we will only be using half as many resources, right?

Well, as alluring as that may sound, the truth is that the world has always had a huge problem with poverty.  Even when the global population was down around 100 million people there was rampant poverty.

The number of people is not the problem.
The problem is the insatiable greed of the elite.
The global elite have systematically exploited the poor all over the planet, they have gobbled up the resources of the world wherever they have found them and now they are hoarding their wealth as millions upon millions suffer desperately.

Well, in the end the global elite will have to answer to a higher power.

According to the most recent "Global Wealth Report" by Credit Suisse, the wealthiest 0.5% control over 35% of the wealth of the world.  That qualifies as hoarding wealth.  Other estimates put the concentration of wealth at the very top of the food chain much higher than that.

But sadly, the problem of greed is not going to be solved any time soon. Global supplies of food and fresh water are going to continue to diminish. The world economy is going to continue to become increasingly unstable.  If it was always your desire to live in "interesting times", then you are about to get your wish.  

Things are about to get extremely "interesting" on this planet.

Inflation in China - Remain High but Not Hyper


Though we see the current inflation is high, but China is not in hyper inflation, and the public seems to hold confidence on the government being able to regain control. While the government targets at 4% in CPI, we forecast CPI to reach 4.3% on average, characterized high in 1H and trend down in the second half.
  • Inflation stays the high level. China NBS estimates Jan CPI up by 4.9% with food price rose 10.3% and non-food price edged by 2.6%. This inflation figure is slightly lower than the market expectation of 5.2%. Food price is the highest since Aug 2008, and non-food price is the highest in our record back to Jan 1999.
  • Foods would take a weight of 30.1%. Despite NBS argues the change in CPI weights has minimal impacts on CPI level, we see the CPI weight change could have lowered overall CPI by 0.19 ppt. Although NBS detailed the changes in CPI weights, but refuse to publish CPI weight in detail. If based on 10.3% food price, and 2.6% non-food price, coming out 4.9% in CPI, then food weight should be 29.9% in Jan 2011, and should be 32.1% in 2010. Based on 10.3% increase in food price, and 2.6% up by non-food price, coming out 4.918% in CPI, then food weight should be 30.1% in Jan 2011, and should be 32.3% in 2010 while NBS told food weight is slushed by 2.21 ppts.
  • Non-food price should be largely underreported. Though non-food price has reached the highest in our record (back to Jan 1999), we still have doubt onto the statistics such as garment and clothing, transportation and telecommunication, housing and others. For instance, clothing price decreased by 0.2%. Though minimal, it is very contradictory to common feeling. In fact, ex-factory prices of clothes under PPI rose 3.8% y-y or 0.5% m-m in January also in NBS statistics. This should be largely attribute to price samples.
  • Food prices would remain at high level. While vegetable and some special fruit price would face a downward adjustment after CNY, grain price, which surged 15.1%, would be hard to set back before the summer grain harvest. China officially reported to have experienced 7 consecutive years bump harvest of grains, but market does not see to have a large amount of surplus supply of grains. High food prices would be hard to go down as 8 provinces in China have been suffering from serious drought in the past more than 3 months.  
  • Labor costs undergo a large increase. Media covers widely about short supply in labor force both in coastal areas and hinterland areas after CNY. Labor market in Guangdong and Zhejiang reports labor costs have increased by 10-30% in the past a month. While tens of million of migrant workers return to their rural homes for their family reunion, labor costs for households, retails, restaurants and other service institution in cities cross the country surged. This is partly reflected in CPI under prices of family services, which is up by 11.4% in January.
  • Higher-than-expected PPI suggests stronger cost-push inflation going forwards. January PPI rose 6.6%, higher than market expectation, the highest since May 10. Taking domestic and international factors into consideration, it is hard to see PPI to lower anytime soon.


Monetary authorities exercised tight control over fund-raising
  • January new renminbi loans ended up Rmb1.04t, some 20% less than market expectation. This outcome confirmed once CBRC once warned that it wanted January new loans no more than Rmb1t, while PBOC tended to allow some RMB1.2tr. Because of this tight control, M1 growth slowed to only 13.6% from 21.2% in last Dec and 39% in January 2010. While household deposits increased by Rmb1.42t, corporate deposit decreased by Rmb1.27t. Apparently, corporate liquidity has been largely tightening up. As a result, short supply in corporate cash-flow have largely boosted interbank lending market. While overnight interbank rate once exceed 7%, the weighted interbank market lending rate reached 3.7% and repo rate surged to 4.29% in January, 218 bps higher than the same period last year.
  • Monetary policy implementation seems to have been a bit too tight. Monetary authorities have been made accountable to the high housing prices and the current high inflation. Both PBOC and CBRC have been under pressure to normalize the social fund-raising. From PBOC Quarterly Report (4Q2010), aggregate fund-raising (including loans, stocks, treasury bonds and corporate bonds) was Rmb11.11t in 2010, 14.3% less than 2009. CBRC warned to take another 10% cut into new loans from last year's incremental.
  • It is hard to continue such a tough tightening. January new loans operation gives us two information. First of all, the monetary authorities are able to control credit loans if they determine to and if they are allowed to. Second, how much fund-raising through credit loans should be made depends on the political bargain between the central and local governments. We expect the credit financing to local projects would be a hot debate during the incoming NPC (March 5-15). The monetary policy operation may have to repeat "stop and go" cycle after the NPC in March.
  • As a result, economic growth would remain strong and inflation would have to tolerate high.