Shunyata, thanks for an interesting post. You say you have no dircet experienece in trading commodities derivatives - and nor do I, so we're in good company.

I'd like to make a point about the cost of production. In the past it was true that when the oil price went up, high cost US production would come on line, increase supply and the price would drop and so on. That was in the days of 10 to 30 $ oil. The major oil cos are still budgeting projects around $35 and herein lies a major disconnect between supply and the market.

I'd guess that on average Saudi production costs are less than $5/bbl. But Saudi Arabia has more to run on its oil revenues than just oil fields - the whole country runs on this revenue. And this brings me to my main point, and that is the roll of OPEC and KSA in particular as swing producers. Global spare capacity is now so tight that OPEC is basically in control of the market. If KSA decides for whatever reason to drop production, price will go up and vice versa. One problem the market is facing right now is also tracking the $. The oil price has not risen as much in Europe as in the USA owing to $ depreciation.

Where am I heading with this? I think KSA now wields enormous power in oil markets. There are those who believe they wield no power as events are now out of their hands - but I don't concur. What I see in the production chart is a possible trend of rising bottoms in Saudi production. Each time they cut to support price they are having to cut less deeply. There have been four cyclic cuts this decade. Big problems arise when Saudi no longer has to cut production to support price - and it looks like that day is fast apparoaching (15 nov 2011 - private joke with SAT).


I'd also just repost this chart from Luis which shows the oil price falling in Au currency since mid 2005 - but that it is rising again.


http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/3021

I agree with your comments about "safe havens" - land is probably best, gold is good for trinkets - but uranium at $75 a pound looks like it is worth a punt these days.

In terms of investments, isn't the best safe haven from Peak Oil, uh, oil? There are many Oil and Gas trusts both here and in Canada that will let you buy reserves. An example is Penn West Energy trust (PWE) that has 1P + 2P reserves of 2 bbl/share, with a share going for $31. Yes, they're depleting, but unit holders get the revenues, and Peak Oil awareness is coming faster than the depletion.

Perhaps an even better safe have are trusts heavy in natural gas reserves - natural gas is not up to where its historical ratio vs oil should be, and sooner or later it will revert as peak oil awareness comes.

In a Peak Oil future, the only commodity or asset that counts for anything is oil and its proxies.

isn't the best safe haven from Peak Oil, uh, oil?

Yes I agree. In the UK you can buy rolling futures of Brent and WTI contracts - and of course a stellar array of oil cos. I guess my main point is right now historic precedents may get blown out of the window and I'd prefer invaluable uranium (nu.l) to essentially worthless gold. Gold is a manifestation of greed that consumes vast amounts of energy to produce - and that's it.

Gold is a manifestation of greed that consumes vast amounts of energy to produce - and that's it.

Gold is a manifestation of lack on confidence in paper currency. If peak oil makes it very expensive or difficult to mine gold, then the above ground stock of gold is going to be even more valuable.

I find it amusing that you consider gold intrinsically worthless, while advocating oil company stocks and rolling futures :-)

Gold has been considered valuable for 5000 years, does not rust or corrode, is easy to store, is not affected by fraud, its supply cannot be inflated by central banks and does not fear counter party defaults. The only problem with gold is that it does not pay interest. That is why you can't keep all your money in gold.

What is the intrinsic worth of any stock or future?

Suyog - I was being provocative and serious at the same time.

Gold has been considered valuable for 5000 years

By a handfull of people from a global population measured in millions for much of the time?

Thinking way into the future - say 2025 - what would you rather own? Land on which you can grow food? Uranium which you can sell to a power company to make electricity from which you can make fertilizer and all sorts of other fuel and power. Or gold, which you can just look at, and hope no one steals? I dare say by then folks may be more inclined to steal your carrots than your gold?

But the point you make about paper rolling futures is well made - who knows what lies behind these SECURITIES - LOL - from the land of Northern Rock - turned to sand in the space of days - which brings us back to gold?

We don't know what the world will look like in 2025.

At least for the next 5 years, gold, gold mining stocks, Canadian oil & natural gas royalty trusts, oil & natural gas company stocks (e.g. Encana), railroad stocks (e.g., BNI) and cash (some combination of US $, Canadian $ & Euros) seems appropriate.

Don't you agree?

Suyog - whilst frequently fishing for tips, I usually try to avoid discussion about investment strategies on TOD. But I don't disagree with what you say here.

Over a year ago I converted many investments to cash and have since distrubuted that cash among several, large banks that are underexposed to mortgagaes and "private equity" deals.

I used to punt on small stocks, but am aware in a downturn they are often hit hardest and so am now focussed on larger companies. I'm also shy of companies that are over exposed to political risks. In the O&G sector I like STL.Ol, ECA.TO and BG.L group. TLW.L is my O&G punting stock - sittting on new discoveries in Ghana and Uganda.

I think JK's rational on gold detailed below is certainly worth considering.

gold aprox $800/ oz.

Oil Aprox $80/barrel

Triuranium octoxide at aprox $80/lb.

Good land 10 acres aprox = $800,000 (where I live)

or 10,000 barrels of oil,

or 1000 lbs of Triuranium octoxide

or 62 lbs gold

"Here jack, I would like to buy your land" .... go figure!

or should we be thinking in terms of cows? Maybe one should start storing cows in their apartment till they have enough cows to buy that land, "Holy sH!t Batman! Look at the pile of manure in this cave". Apres le deluge, gold I think could be Royal. depending on the circumstances.

Not in a major depression. I could see the price of oil (in current dollars) easily dropping by more than 50%. Gold could also do that, but first it needs to achieve its true value, which is at least 4 times the current value.

I own ERF, PWI and PWE. PWI jumped 32% last week when it was bought by a company in Abu Dhabi :-) I can see this happening more and more in the future. As new oil and natural gas finds dwindle, there will be more acquisitions of existing properties by cash rich enterprises. Even if they don't get acquired, I don't see how one can lose by buying oil & natural gas royalty trusts that pay between 10%-14% dividends in Canadian dollars.

Canadian trusts were hurt last year with a change in tax law that will make it much harder to replace their falling reserves with new fields. Personally I like a few US E&P's... IMO producers will not see serious changes in tax laws, and a few of these are expanding reserves. I like gpor (oil) and gmxr (ng). I used to like ard, but the price has risen so much that it is no longer a bargain. Good luck.

Regarding the SA production chart: somebody (can't remember if it was you) said he thought the fall in SA output y/y was too fast to be natural. IMO the chart you post shows that the decline in 01/02 was much more rapid. It would be interesting to see past declines, those which we now agree were voluntary, and compare the decline rate in those periods with the current one. IMO when SA decides to cut output the decline is almost immediate... how long, after all, does it take to turn off the tap?

Regarding gold: it is easy to place a value on something, eg gold, in line with one's own thoughts of intrisic value. What is the value of lipstick? Quite a few billions are spent on them each year. What about post peak? Well, gold and cosmetics were big items before oil was discovered in PA, both in the distant past (plenty of both were found in Tut's tomb) as well as throughout modern history. On what basis would the future be different from the past? Imagine for a moment a future with very expensive oil and little faith in fiat currencies. What might an oil seller demand for his dwindling supply? Food and protection, of course, but what after that?

Investors have shunned gold since the peak in Jan 1980, and with good reason - gold has performed poorly against nearly anything you can compare it with, from oil to silver, from wheat to land. HIstorically, investors buy gold when they fear inflation, ie the rate of increase in the cpi is greater than short term interest rates (which may be true now, gov statistics are suspect) and/or when investors lose faith in a major currency (which is certainly true now.) Gold took off exactly one year ago, when the dollar decline accelerated. GOld is up 25% as the dollar is down 12.5% vs the Euro (a more modest 7% trade weighted, likely meaning we will buy less from Europe, and sell them more, while trade with asia, mostly pegged to the dollar, will remain relatively stagnant.)

Last year investors were said to have bought 10 tons of the 1600 mined, this year it is 300 tons, with the result that price is up 25%. How high might it go? Oil is close to the inflation adjusted peak, which would supposedly be around $106/b; if SA does not produce much more oil end year we are likely to reach this level soon. For gold to reach its inflation adjusted peak it would have to go to ~$2500/oz. IMO the only question is, will the dollar slide stop soon and, if so, why?

Resource companies leverage the resource price... small changes in price have a much larger change in net and, usually, share price. I like the US firm AUY best.

JK - yes it probably was me who said the recent fall in KSA production was too rapid to be natural decline. I'd agree the falls in 00-01 and 02-03 were more steep. But curiously, the current fall is more similar to the slide of 97-98 that took us into $10 oil. The current slide has halted and the next 6 months will be crucial to understanding where Saudi production capacity lies - I still fully expect to see thier production rising - so long as the wheels stay on the global economy - which I also doubt will happen.

I'd guess the Saudi's have the most sophisticated oil demand - supply model on the planet. Exactly how they behave will depend on a myriad of variables - including politics with the OECD and other consumers and OPEC members.

Ancient Egyptians dressing themselves in gold and lipstick - good taste I'd say.

As for gold as a store of value in a post peak world? I really really don't know. My gut feel is that past metrics may become redundant as food, heat and security take over. But in a world of barter, maybe gold will have a roll to play. On the other hand, in a world of rapidly expanding renewable energy, owning energy, geared into building new energy capacity may make more secure sense.

Excluding Buffett, most investors think in days, months or maybe a few years. PO may be at hand, but even if so we will likely remain on or near the plateau for a while, say thru 2012. In the mean time both investors and resource sellers will remain concerned re: the dollar so long as the US evil twin deficits continue as they are, and I see no end in sight. IMO the sliding dollar may even accelerate.

Consider that the current value of oil exports exceeds 1 trillion/y while the total value of all mined gold is only 60 billion/y. Oil exporters are converting dollar sales to Euros, either overtly or covertly, but they will be aware that the euro zone growth, and profits of eurozone companies, will be severely damaged if/when the US growth stalls or recedes... indeed, european exporters are already squealing on account of euro strength. Accordingly, and as part of their diversification strategy, it makes sense for oil exporters to divert a portion of their revenue stream into gold, and not least because the dozing gold buffalo has lumbered to its feet. Even a 5% diversion, say 60 billion, would be too much for the gold market or, to put it another way, such a diversion would IMO at least double the price (as noted in my previous post, investors buying 20% of new gold boosted price 25%.)

The point of the discussion was whether gold might be a good investment, presumably over just the next few years (in the long run we are all dead.) IMO gold will be an excellent investment over such a time frame. You mentioned uranium, which has already enjoyed a great run as investors consider the ending of bomb conversion... this could be a good move, but one less likely to interest ME investors, public or private.

JK - you've convinced me of the merits of Au in the short to middle term. It's an industry though I don't understand as well as oil. The sliding $ also muddies investment waters for non US these days. A lot of the gain in oil has been chewed by falling $. And I'm also told that buoyancy of US market right now is in part based on multinational earnings getting converted to $s.

However...

You mentioned uranium, which has already enjoyed a great run as investors consider the ending of bomb conversion... this could be a good move, but one less likely to interest ME investors, public or private.

I'd imagine if ME investors showed too much interest here a few eybrows might be raised.

I thought that this was a very interesting story when it came out. It doesn't appear to be in dispute that the Saudis are short of natural gas. I have related a report that I am aware of that they are going to have to divert 500,000 bpd of liquids production to power plants and desalination plants in 2007 and 2008, because of shortfalls in natural gas production (which is apparently reflected in Rembrandt's estimate that Saudi liquids consumption is up at over 9% from 2006).

It is true that coal is cheaper that oil, but I assume that the Saudis will have to modify their power plants and desalination plants to handle coal, instead of natural gas, NGL's or petroleum.

Which raises an interesting question. If they have so much surplus liquids capacity, why go to the expense of modifying power plants and desalination plants to handle coal?

http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntm73016.htm
Arab energy giants eye coal imports

28-06-07 They hold over 30% of global oil and nearly 8% of gas reserves, but at least four Gulf Arab states are considering importing coal for power generation as they struggle to meet domestic demand.

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Bahrain are all looking at the possibility of building coal-fired power plants, analysts and industry sources said. The region's electricity needs are soaring as petrodollars feed rapid economic expansion.

"It's absurd in a way but there is not enough gas," said Mark Lewis, Managing Director of Energy Market Consultants.

"They have a serious problem in power generation and are having difficulties balancing their systems. Coal is a well known technology and could be built fairly quickly. It's probably quicker than the lead times for importing gas."

Burning imported coal instead of locally produced liquid fuels makes enormous sense, coal being so much cheaper. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more efficient CTL process.

Importing coal in lieu of nearby gas, iran or qatar, maybe 1/4 the price of SA oil/therm, is a better question. Maybe coal FOB eastern SA is cheaper than qatari gas... it seems the required pipeline shouldn't be that long or expensive... or, maybe the saudis are floating the coal idea as a negotiating ploy.

RE: gold and silver. I don't thing anyone has mentioned the gold/silver 'carry trade' with respect to these precious metals. I don't think a similar situation exists with any other commodity. If someone know of one, I'd like to hear about it.

In the mid-eighties it seems some bankers got the bright idea to set up a gold and silver leasing scheme involving gold and silver producers. At first it seemed like a great idea. The banks, with tons of financially non-performing bullion in vaults could 'lease' this metal to mining companies who need to be able to guarantee a steady supply to the market in spite of the vagaries of the mining industry. A win-win situation, right? Well, at the ridiculously low lease rate, typically 1% or so, it didn't take long for other deep-pocketed players to realize that they could 'lease' a ton of gold, sell it into the market, invest the money and get 5%, 8%, 10% 'free' money. It also didn't take long for same gold/silver lessors to realize that if the spot price of the metal was lower (or at least, no higher) when they had to pay back the bullion, this was additional gravy. The result of all this was a de-facto conspiracy to both keep the price of gold and silver down and to empty both bank and government coffers of the precious metals. The other result is a potential time-bomb of a price spike when the actual supply wall gets hit. This is especially true of silver that is actually consumed and is actually more scarce in refined form than gold right now.

Just another way a given commodity's market price can get screwed up beyond reason and be far away from what most of us might consider to be rational fundamentals.