The Oil Drum

A good many years ago, I read George Soros' "The Alchemy of Finance", which introduced me to the concept of reflexivity, which in a nutshell is when observers of a phenomenon can't help but impact the phenomenon itself via their 'observing', thus changing the original underlying fundamentals and setting in motion a boom-bust dynamic (i.e. more exaggerated trends in both directions). Since Mr. Soros recently spoke to Congress regarding the oil futures market 'bubble', I thought I'd take a closer look at the concept of reflexivity, both as it relates to oil and commodities in general, as well as its broader implications for efforts in raising awareness of global resource constraints.

Nope, That’s Not Money

Prudent Bear’s Doug Noland has for years been pointing out that one of the drivers of the credit bubble has been the ever-broadening definition of money. As the global economy expanded without a hic-up, more and more instruments came to be used as a store of value or medium of exchange or even a standard against which to value other things—in other words, as money.

Thus mortgage-backed bonds and even more exotic things came to be seen as nearly risk-free and infinitely liquid. In Noland’s terms, credit gained “moneyness,” which sent the effective global money supply through the roof. This in turn allowed the U.S. and its trading partners to keep adding jobs and appearing to grow, despite debt levels that were rising into the stratosphere. For a while there, borrowing actually made the world richer, because both the cash received and the debt created functioned as money.

With a few months of hindsight, it’s now clear that debt-as-money was not one of humanity’s better ideas. When the U.S. housing market—the source of all that mortgage-backed pseudo money—began to tank, hedge funds found out that an asset-backed bond wasn’t exactly the same thing as a stack of hundred dollar bills. The global economy then started taking inventory of what it was using as money. And it began crossing things off the list. Subprime ABS? Nope, that’s not money. BBB corporate bonds? Nope. High-grade corporates? Alas, no. Credit default swaps? Are you kidding me?

No longer able to function as money, these instruments are being “repriced” (a slick little euphemism for “dumped for whatever anyone will pay”), which is causing a cascade failure of the many business models that depend on infinite liquidity. The effective global money supply is contracting at a double-digit rate, reversing out much of the past decade’s growth.

We have been living in inflationary times, for as long as most of us can remember. The money supply keeps expanding and prices increase over time as a result. Central bankers have many tools at their disposal which they can use to tweak the economy – they can raise or lower interest rates, can control reserve requirements for fractional reserve banking and can inject liquidity into the banking system, among other things – and we have become used to thinking that they can prevent the kind of 'economic accidents' that previous episodes of excess have led to in the past. Especially in recent years – since the apparently successful containment of the dot com aftermath - we have acted as if risk were a thing of the past. Sliced, diced and spread around Wall Street and the rest of the global financial system, risk has seemed tamed, contained and controlled, until last week that is.

For years, industry insiders and so-called experts have proclaimed the virtues of slicing, dicing, and repackaging risk. They waxed on about how borrowers and savers, and society as a whole, could only benefit from such machinations. They suggested any sort of exposure could be disbursed and dissipated to the point where it essentially disappeared. Some even claimed that the crises of the past would no longer exist.

Yet amid the hype and assurances, few supporters spoke of the dark side of wanton and widespread risk-shifting. They didn’t seem — or want — to acknowledge that by combining complicated risks in unfamiliar and unnatural ways, the end result could be an uncontrollable monstrosity—one that eventually turned on its masters.
Nor did they heed the notion that by scattering risk into every nook and cranny of the global financial system, the vast web of overlapping linkages virtually guaranteed that serious problems in one sector, market, or country would trigger far-reaching shockwaves.

All of a sudden, markets are reeling around the world, deals are unraveling, the mainstream press is talking about a credit crunch and the world’s central bankers are injecting unprecedented amounts of liquidity to calm the markets. Risk has made a comeback, and in that environment the evident concern of the central bankers does not seem very reassuring.

Yesterday's financial convulsion is arguably the beginning of the end for a credit expansion of epic proportions that has underlain the economic boom of the last 25 years. It had its roots in the corruption of fractional reserve banking, as directly overseen and facilitated by the Federal Reserve. For those who look to the Fed now for a solution, perhaps it would be advisable to look instead at how the Fed created the current mess.

Fractional reserve banking was designed to provide a controlled credit expansion. However, in the early 1990s, the Fed began to find its rules too restrictve and acted to lower reserve ratios on some deposits and eliminate them for others. In addition, creative accounting implicitly condoned by the Fed allowed banks to circumvent even the limited remaining need to hold reserves. According to the Fed itself (PDF warning, see page 44), by using overnight retail sweep accounts, banks can transfer a proportion of deposits out of the category for which they must hold funds at the Fed (checking deposits), and use them to invest in interest-earning assets.

The lowering of reserve ratios and the acceptance of sweeps by the Fed over a period of many years demonstrates its attitude towards the need for reserves in the first place. How can the Fed claim to be concerned about the unsustainable expansion of the money supply (ie inflation), via the creation of essentially limitless amounts of credit, when it has been fully aware of the corruption of US fractional reserve banking all along? And how can the Fed be unaware of the eventual consequence of uncontrolled credit expansion - a debt crunch - when it has played out many times before?

Massive Surge in Sweeps

Logic? Who cares about logic? Banks are allowed to lend out checking account deposits even though they pay no interest on those accounts. Customers assume the risk and banks literally sweep up the profit. This is a sweet deal for the banks and is accomplished ironically enough via sweeps.

Sweeps are a mechanism by which "excess capital" is swept from some accounts into other buckets based on patterns of expected behavior (not all customers are going to demand all of their money all at once).

Money in the accounts where the money was swept is allowed to be lent out. In essence, the money sitting in your checking account right now is not really sitting there at all. It's lent out all over the place (in theory overnight but in practice for god knows how long or for what)....

....The study does not say it explicitly but I will. There are essentially no bank reserves. Wait a second, I take that back. The combination of fractional reserve lending and sweeps really means there are negative reserves. Far more money has been lent out than really exists.

_{Sweeps of Retail Transaction Deposits into Savings Deposits}

_{Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.}

Will the Fed cut interest rates to alleviate the developing credit crunch, and will it have the desired effect if they do? Can lowering the cost of credit overcome risk aversion and the fear of cascading default? If not then the Fed will not be able to prevent the contraction of the money supply and the spread of contagion amid a sea of margin calls.

In Canada, oil sands fever continues unabated and a drilling frenzy may be shaping up in the Arctic. One political leader urges the defence of sovereignty in the Arctic, while another holds talks on North American Union well away from the public eye. In Ontario, businesses are paid not to consume power.

On the climate front, northern infrastructure faces a serious challenge as melting permafrost undermines it's foundations, while Australia experiences a 1000 year drought.

Finally, we remember that 62 years ago, the world was waking up to the beginning of the nuclear weapons age.

Mortgage Maze May Increase Foreclosures

And the very innovation that made mortgages so easily available — an assembly line process known on Wall Street as securitization — is creating an obstacle for troubled borrowers. As they try to restructure their loans, they are often thwarted, lawyers say, by strict protections put in place for investors who bought the mortgage pools.

This impasse could exacerbate the housing slump, pushing more homeowners into foreclosure. That would lead to a bigger glut of properties for sale, depressing home prices further.

“Securitization led to this explosion of bad loans, and now it is harder to unwind and modify them even where it is in the best interests of both the borrower and the investors,” Kurt Eggert, an associate professor at the Chapman University School of Law in Orange, Calif., said in an interview. “The thing that caused the problem is making it harder to solve the problem.”

Creating difficulties is the complex design of mortgage securities.

The situation in the credit markets continues to worsen as a sudden attack of risk aversion rapidly dries up liquidity. And this is before the resetting of adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) begins in earnest - to the tune of $50 billion - in October. Watch this space.

On the Canadian energy scene, Shell pumps $27 billion into the oil sands, even as oil patch profitability falls. Abu Dhabi wants to invest in Canadian power plants, and there are plans for BC to host an LNG terminal. Wind power grows rapidly in Ontario and Quebec, making a few enemies along the way. In BC they ask: should public transit be free?

On the climate front, water is the issue - too little and too much. Finally, in the tug-of-war between efficiency and resilience, efficiency has the upper hand, but what price will we pay for allowing our life support system to become brittle?

Going With The Flow?

You may remember that our definition of household cash is as broad as can be. We include all household "banking products", per se, but also include all household holdings of bonds, inclusive of Treasuries, Agencies, corporates, muni's and mortgage backed paper. Implicitly, we are assuming bond holdings could be converted to cash at a moments notice. So what follows is simply total household cash less total household liabilities over the last six decades.

North American integration is making the news again on both sides of the border, and on the other side of the Atlantic. Meanwhile, another large Canadian company - Alcan - becomes the subject of a takeover some describe as a symptom of Canadian economic suicide. The natural gas drilling crash affects Baker Hughes, the Chinese feel unwelcome in the Alberta oil patch and concerns are raised over the safety of LNG terminals in Québec.

In the US the subprime credit market problems are beginning to snowball, while the folly of relying on sophisticated risk analysis models based on the 'data' from 'liar's loans' becomes apparent. Wall Street's ability to value assets is called into question, the lawyers begin to get in on the act and the US tries to sell mortgaged-backed securities to China.

How cosy do we want to be with the Americans?

Prime Minister Stephen Harper will be meeting in Montebello, Que., with U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Felipe Calderón on Aug. 20 and 21.

These meetings seem to be kept deliberately low-profile. Do we, as Canadians, really want to continue down the road toward deep integration with the United States with regard to our resources?

In March 2005, Paul Martin, Vicente Fox and Bush met in Waco, Tex., to ratify the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). The SPP takes NAFTA's goal of continental economic integration much further by including security and foreign policy issues, and by speeding up the process of regulatory harmonization integral to the first Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement.

All this has been done quietly, resulting in a lack of public awareness or input. It should also be noted that all three North American governments seem to be moving quickly toward a continental resource pact, a North American security perimeter, and common agricultural and other polices related to our health and environment. To date, the public has been neither informed or consulted.

We should ask our members of parliament their position on these very important meetings, and when public input will be initiated.

This is our country. Let's keep it strong and free.

Elizabeth Eidt, Stratford

In the fields of finance and energy, there have been some remarkable developments this week, particularly with institutions that reverse their stated views, and probably their tactics and policies.

The IEA earlier released a report that said, though not in so many words, that peak oil is near. Then its CEO Claude Mandil gave an interview to Le Monde, in which he said Russia has peaked, and OPEC is not telling the truth about world oil supplies.

S&P and Moody's, Wall Street's preferred rating agencies, changed their approach to the ongoing mortgage malaise by downgrading, or threatening to downgrade, many mortgage-based investment grade bonds. This shift will be felt throughout the credit markets, and there may be much more to come. And the UK is now joining the mortgage mayhem crowd.

No such shift for NAR: they predict US home prices will rebound in 2008, though foreclosures rose 87% and a record number of ARM's will reset this fall.

Meanwhile in Canada, the sovereignty that our government seeks to defend in the Arctic is being undermined at an SPP meeting in Montebello, Quebec.

Canada flexes its muscles in scramble for the Arctic

Mr Harper's message, and the belligerent style in which it was delivered, are a sign that the Arctic, the vast ice-covered ocean around the North Pole, is hotting up - both literally, through global warming, and metaphorically as a political issue. With Canada, Denmark, Russia and the United States all having claims on the region, together with those of Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland, international tension in the region is mounting.

There was no dissembling in Mr Harper's speech. "The ongoing discovery of the north's resource riches, coupled with the potential impact of climate change, has made the region a growing area of interest and concern," he said. As the statement implies, two areas of international competition lie behind the Canadian prime minister's actions. The first is that the Arctic region is rich in natural resources. It is thought to hold up to a quarter of the world's undiscovered reserves of oil and gas, which as the established fields in the Middle East and elsewhere run dry will become increasingly valuable and sought after. There are also known to be major deposits of diamonds, silver, copper, zinc and, potentially, uranium. It also has rich fish stocks.

Desire to exploit these resources has led to tensions with the US over the offshore border between Alaska and Canada, an area known as the "wedge", where one day oil and gas exploration could prove to be lucrative.

Today's headlines lead with coverage of the on-going crisis in the debt markets, and an explanation of the financial engineering underlying much of the global liquidity bubble. Debt ratings have not been adjusted to reflect current market conditions, meaning that 'asset' valuations are over-stated. No institution wants to force asset sales for fear of revealing just how much real valuations differ from nominal ones, but eventually such a sale will occur - with the potential to cause an abrupt repricing of a wide range of 'assets' (many of which will actualy be revealed to be essentially worthless). Leverage will magnify the losses, leading to a very serious financial crisis. One estimate (below) puts the potential losses, once assets are eventually marked to market, at 20 times the sum involved in the LTCM crisis in 1998 - so far, and getting worse by the day.

The Round-Up is also convering the Canadian energy scene, as well as environmental and international news, in that order. Oil companies leaving Venezuela and aiming for the oil sands are finding that all is not clear sailing, while China is entering the oil sands for the first time. Nunavut seeks control over future oil and gas revenues, Newfoundland and Labrador wants to bypass Quebec in selling electricity to the US, and the slow down in natural gas drilling is hurting frontier communities in Alberta and BC.

Credit crunch will 'shred investment portfolios to ribbons'

The near collapse of two Bear Stearns hedge funds has lifted the rock on our 21st century mutant capitalism, exposing the bugs beneath to a rare shock of naked light.

When creditors led by Merrill Lynch forced a fire-sale of assets, they inadvertently revealed that up to $2 trillion of debt linked to the crumbling US sub-prime and "Alt A" property market was falsely priced on books.

Even A-rated securities fetched just 85pc of face value. B-grades fell off a cliff. The banks halted the sale before "price discovery" set off a wider chain-reaction.

"It was a cover-up," says Charles Dumas, global strategist at Lombard Street Research. He believes the banks alone have $750bn in exposure. They may have to call in loans....

....Wobbles are turning to fear. Just $3bn of the $20bn junk bonds planned for issue last week were actually sold. Lenders are refusing "covenant-lite" deals for leveraged buy-outs, especially those with "toggles" that allow debtors to pay bills with fresh bonds. Carlyle, Arcelor, MISC, and US Food Services are all shelving plans to raise money. This is how a credit crunch starts.

"This is the big one: all investment portfolios will be shredded to ribbons," said Albert Edwards, from Dresdner Kleinwort.

Why food costs more

Since the rise in agriculture started gaining altitude last spring, hedge funds have been pouring money into commodity exchanges, driving up prices and transforming backwater grain bourses like the Kansas City Board of Trade and the Winnipeg Commodity Exchange into highstakes casinos. Since 2005, corn has nearly doubled. Wheat is up 50% in the same period, while canola, one of the biggest crops on the Canadian prairie, has climbed 34%.

But the biggest effect of all the new hedge fund cash sloshing through the system is a major increase in volatility. Prices are on the rise but the upward trend has been anything but smooth.

"We are unaccustomed to this," said Mr. Gary, who adds that he hasn't seen this level of volatility since the 1970s when a group of big speculators briefly "muscled the markets around." But what's happening now is different, far more treacherous for traditional players.

Like many experts, Mr. Gary believes the markets have become disconnected from the fundamentals as prices rocket through peaks and valleys that have little to do with supply and demand.

Many of the hedge funds are trend players, who make bets based on the technical details around the direction they think prices are heading, moving in and out of the market with lightening speed. For them, volatility is an opportunity to make money.