Best of the Week
Most Popular
1. Will Gold Price Breakout? 3 Things to Watch… - Jordan_Roy_Byrne
2.China Invades Saudi Oil Realm: PetroDollar Kill - Jim_Willie_CB
3.Bitcoin Price Trend Forecast, Paypal FUD Fake Cryptocurrency Warning - Nadeem_Walayat
4.The Stock Market Trend is Your Friend ’til the Very End - Rambus_Chartology
5.This Isn’t Your Grandfather’s (1960s) Inflation Scare - F_F_Wiley
6.GDX Gold Mining Stocks Fundamentals - Zeal_LLC
7.US Housing Real Estate Market and Banking Pressures Are Building - Chris_Vermeulen
8.Return of Stock Market Volatility Amidst Political Chaos and Uncertain Economy - Buildadv
9.Can Bitcoin Price Rally Continue After Paypal Fake FUD Attack? - Nadeem_Walayat
10.Warning Economic Implosion on the Horizon - Chris_Vermeulen
Last 7 days
Chaos Capitalists Short Countries - How Chanos Got China Wrong - 24th Apr
Artificial Intelligence Defines the Political News Narrative - 24th Apr 18
Stock Market "Oops, They Did It Again" - 24th Apr 18
Fox in the Henhouse: Why Interest Rates Are Rising - 23rd Apr 18
Stocks and Bonds, This is Not a Market - 23rd Apr 18
Happy Anniversary Silver Investors! - 23rd Apr 18
The Hottest Commodity Play In 2018 - 23rd Apr 18
Stock Market Correction Turns Consolidation - 23rd Apr 18
Silver Squeeze, Gold Fails & GDX Breadth - 23rd Apr 18
US Economy Is Cooked, the Growth Cycle has Peaked - 23rd Apr 18
Inflation, With a Shelf Life - 23rd Apr 18 - Gary_Tanashian
Stock Market Predictive Modeling Is Calling For A Continued Rally - 22nd Apr 18
SWEATCOIN - Get PAID to WALK! Incentive to Burn Fat and Lose Weight - Review - 22nd Apr 18
Sheffield Local Elections 2018 Forecast Results - 22nd Apr 18
How Long Does it take for a 10%+ Stock Market Correction to Make New Highs - 21st Apr 18
Sheffield Ruling Labour Party Could Lose 10 Council Seats at May Local Elections - 21st Apr 18
Crude Oil Price Trend Forecast - Saudi Arabia $80 ARAMCO Stock IPO Target - 21st Apr 18
Gold Price Nearing Bull Market Breakout, Stocks to Follow - 20th Apr 18
What’s Bitcoin Really Worth? - 20th Apr 18
Stock Market May "Let Go" - 20th Apr 18
Overwhelming Evidence Against Near Stock Market Grand Supercycle Top - 20th Apr 18
Crude Oil Price Trend Forecast - Saudi's Want $100 for ARAMCO Stock IPO - 20th Apr 18
The Incredible Silver Trade – What You Need to Know - 20th Apr 18
Is War "Hell" for the Stock Market? - 19th Apr 18
Palladium Bullion Surges 17% In 9 Days On Russian Supply Concerns - 19th Apr 18
Breadth Study Suggests that Stock Market Bottom is Already In - 19th Apr 18
Allegory Regarding Investment Decisions Made On Basis Of Government’s Income Statement, Balance Sheet - 19th Apr 18
Gold – A Unique Repeat of the 2007 and How to Profit - 19th Apr 18
Abbeydale Park Rise Cherry Tree's in Blossom - Sheffield Street Tree Protests - 19th Apr 18
The Stock Market “Turn of the Month Effect” Exists in 11 of 11 Countries - 18th Apr 18
Winter is Coming - Coming Storms Will Bring Out the Best and Worst in Humanity - 18th Apr 18
What Does it Take to Create Living Wage Jobs? - 18th Apr 18
Gold and Silver Buy Signals - 18th Apr 18
WINTER IS COMING - The Ongoing Fourth Turning Crisis Part2 - 18th Apr 18
A Stock Market Rally on Low Volume is NOT Bearish - 17th Apr 18
Three Gold Charts, One Big Gold Stocks Opportunity - 17th Apr 18
Crude Oil Price As Bullish as it Seems? - 17th Apr 18
A Good Time to Buy Facebook? - 17th Apr 18
THE Financial Crisis Acronym of 2008 is Sounding Another Alarm - 16th Apr 18
Bombs, Missiles and War – What to Expect Next from the Stock Market - 16th Apr 18
Global Debt Bubble Hits New All Time High – One Quadrillion Reasons To Buy Gold - 16th Apr 18
Will Bitcoin Ever Recover? - 16th Apr 18
Stock Market Futures Bounce, But Stopped at Trendline - 16th Apr 18
How To Profit As Oil Prices Explode - 16th Apr 18
Junior Mining Stocks are Close to Breaking Downtrend - 16th Apr 18
Look Inside a Caravan at UK Holiday Park for Summer 2018 - Hoseasons Cayton Bay Sea Side - 16th Apr 18
Stock Market More Weakness? How Much? - 15th Apr 18
Time for the Gold Bulls to Show their Mettle - 15th Apr 18
Trading Markets Amid Sound of Wars - 15th Apr 18
Sugar Commodity Buying Levels Analysis - 14th Apr 18
The Oil Trade May Be Coming Alive - 14th Apr 18

Market Oracle FREE Newsletter

Trading Lessons

When Oil Rides High The Snakeoil Flows

Politics / Crude Oil Feb 28, 2012 - 06:02 AM GMT

By: Andrew_McKillop

Politics

Best Financial Markets Analysis ArticleThe US energy department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) launched its annual Energy Innovation Summit, 27 February, to a backdrop of oil price fear and a ritual bout of warnings on the economic dangers of spiralling oil prices, from media friendly economic gurus usually peddling the debt-deficit-and-doom storyline.


On the oil markets, prices are driven by a generous mix-and-mingle of factors, starting with gung-ho calls to bomb Iran, but soon extend to include the euro declining, even against the dollar, as G20 leaders rebuffed European leaders’ call for them to boost IMF resources which could be handed over PIIGS borrowers and limit the region’s debt crisis. The usual driver of higher oil prices - higher equity prices - was absent for once, underling the 'crisis nature' of present oil price rises. Calls for western oil-importer country leaders "to do something about oil" are multiplying.

ARPA, loosely modeled on a Defense Department program that more than 25 years ago developed the Internet for military communications on a no-limits cost basis, puts seed money behind what US Energy Secretary Chu calls "potentially revolutionary" energy projects. Doing something about oil is necessarily part of the Powerpoint material, but its real world connection is low.

Showing the Obama administration's close linkage with Silicon Valley's class of high profile geek billionaires, and Obama's eagerness to throw more US public money their way "to reinvent energy and save the planet", ARPA has again marshaledBill Gates, Vinod Khosla and other administration-friendly billionaires and power brokers, like Bill Clinton. This year, Gates and Clinton will be there in person to advise on how to throw public money at energy vanity tech and keep geeks happy.

These program supporters and beneficiaries say without blinking that some, even many of their pet projects will fail, but the critical need to save oil makes this spending more urgent than ever. The breakthroughs wanted are officially those which can reduce dependence on foreign oil, reduce carbon emissions, and keep the U.S. at the cutting edge of clean-energy technology.

This is a word-perfect repeat of the refrain the Obama administration, and its Silicon Valley "energy inventor" friends have peddled for more than a half-decade. Due to the old-style gramophone getting stuck in its groove, the USA's basic abandonment of any commitment to cutting carbon emissions at the December COP-17 Durban talks, its serial failures with a range of green energy vanity tech projects, and its massive waste of funding on these failed projects, are carefully ignored.

LOW CARBON INNOVATIVE

The double slogan Low Carbon and New Energy Tech is now thought of, at least by Obama and lookalike western leaders, especially in Europe, as an iconic symbol of progress able to deflect attention and funding from the claimed real goal: find some way to use less oil. The gap between the actual programmes and projects that are supposedly able to save or substitute oil, and their real results and potential for saving oil, even over timespans as far ahead as 15-20 years is now epic-sized.

Making this threat of failure and disappointment, and wasted funding much larger, the goal of saving or substituting oil is rarely placed on view as anything other than a ritual priority. Both in the US and Europe it is mixed and mingled with a growing and anarchic range of nice ideas and gee-whiz vanity tech "solutions", unlikely to address the oil problem in any rational future period. Obama's call to Silicon Valley, a repeat of previous calls he has made, comes on the back of its geek billionaires, headed by Bill Gates, taking a highly ambivalent stance on the role, scope and potential of low carbon, green, alternative or innovative "new energy" ideas.

One reason is simple. Geek appetites for big slabs of other peoples' money are awesome. Last year, Energy Secretary Chu was forced to cancel several ARPA projects, for a combined total of around $15 million, but this is an amount that Bill Gates, Vinod Khosla, Peter Thiel, Bill Joy and other geek billionaires "reinventing energy" lost almost monthly through 2007-2009 on their pet energy projects. And sometimes this loss concerned their own money !

Once bitten, twice shy. Losing their own money, not just Federal, bank, pension fund and private investors' money was a massive 'faux pas' for geek billionaires, causing them an inevitable loss of face. This made them beat a hasty retreat from their "state of the art" new energy tech projects which notably included ethanol and biodiesel fuel ventures that turned south, while doing nothing at all to reduce US dependence on oil, either foreign or domestic. Their herd attitude, today, is to save their own money but to always be available for Federal largesse.

Obama's largesse unfortunately has its own new Hard Times limits: - the total for ARPA funding available this year, which on paper has been bumped up 27% on last year, is $350 million - is enough only for a couple of Airbus-sized corporate planes, burning 5500 litres of kerosene per hour, to whirl the geeks from one urgent meeting to another. ARPA's call for Silicon Valley to reinvent ways to lose money is likely to only receive lip service support from the geeks, unless it concerns Federal funds.

SILICON VALLEY SAVES OIL ?

High-profile support from Clinton and Gates may be a political poke in the eye to US Republicans and others who criticize the whole ARPA programme, Chu’s energy budget, and its effectiveness. Critics can for example point out that Chu played "too little, too late" when cancelling clunker projects. Last year, on the near $15 million of cancelled ARPA projects, less than $4 million was ever recovered and restored to the Federal government. This of course, and unfortunately is loose change from overall waste of Energy Department and related Federal spending across the energy sector, for reasons that are clear to any unbiased observer - but are brushed aside by the carefully chosen ranks of feeders at the spending trough.

The most basic reason is exactly mirrored by European attempts to develop "clean energy". The EU attempts, to be sure, claim they will or may save oil - but oil saving and substitution is never set as the real priority. Instead, supposedly to panic the consumer public into changing their energy habits, the now shopsoiled and tired image of Global Warming catastrophe is ritually aired, still today in 2012, as the clincher reason why almost directionless, but massive public spending must urgently be thrown at ever less well-defined types and forms of "alternate energy".

As in Europe, US energy plans have no need for real accountability, simple cost-benefit numbers, or even a clear direction for pumping what in total are massive funds into uncertain new energy projects. One simple example in both the US and Europe is continuing, at least apparent commitment to ramping up electric car fleets - at proposed subsidy levels in the US as high as $ 10 000 of tax credits for each EV that is purchased. Both Chu and Obama have talked about 1.5 million EVs on US roads by 2015.

Letting their new energy rhetoric take command, they have indicated that as much as 10 times that number being both desirable and possible "by about 2022". Both Sarkozy and Merkel, in Europe, run the same rhetoric through their teleprompter feeds on a regular basis, in the Sarkozy case coming with a supposed outright state grant of 7000 euro for every buyer of a 35 000 euro Nissan Leaf.

Making sure the left hand ignores what the right is doing, Chu's agency will this year award $30 million for projects to develop lightweight fuel tanks for natural gas-powered vehicles, with no admission this technology is totally mature and able to be applied, at low cost, right now, for city and urban region car and light vehicle fleets. Already applied in several Emerging economies on a far wider scale than in the US or Europe, low emission and low cost CNG (compressed natural gas) buses, taxis, cars and light vans operate today in cities like New Delhi and Beijing. The difference with the US and Europe is total.

Schizophrenia and lack of direction in both the US and Europe is shown by Chu's ARPA committing itself to $155 million for 60 projects only in the sector of electrical energy storage and electric power grid capacity and efficiency raising. Recipients are surely illustrious, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, related research institutes and corporate heavyweights like General Electric, but the basic target is the renewable electricity-electric car cluster "circa 2025" that has no relation to the simple need to heavily downsize current appetites for, and habits of oil dependence.

Silicon Valley's flirt with electric cars went straight to vanity tech extremes with the ultra expensive two-seater Tesla Roadster, a good example of energy profligacy and waste, through its fast mode battery recharger sucking 50 kilowatts. Exactly the same energy illiteracy affects the designers, builders and promoters of supposed "middle class EVs" like the Nissan Leaf, also taking 50 kW for a half-hour fast mode recharge, instead of the 5-hour normal rate. One million cars like these, on fast charge, means 50 000 MW of additional power capacity needed for EV owners to use a few hours a day, in what the advertising tells them will help "save the planet". The combined US and EU27 car fleet numbers 415 million cars, making fleet size reduction the real and simplest alternative energy strategy.

SAVING OIL AND THE ENVIRONMENT

The Silicon Valley geek answer, backed by Chu at the same time he backs sane alternatives like CNG vehicles, is that massive spending must proceed on almost-no-hope utility scale electricity storage and mythical super grids.

This will supposedly protect the environment and climate, but all talk of electricity saving and electricity substitution is kept way down the teleprompter. This is because the real goal is simple: extreme spending on projects unlikely to deliver any consumer benefits, but surely able to drive up the mining and metals consumption that will be needed for multi hundred-billion dollar and euro projects for extending power grids, in the European case over a proposed 42 000 kilometres.

Again showing the critical lack of direction or certainty in setting "urgent energy goals", the US legal system is at this time examining demands for repeal of the Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 finding that greenhouse gases, starting with CO2 are "threats to public health". While it is predictable these calls for repeal come from metals and energy mining companies led by Peabody Energy Corp., they also come from the US Chamber of Commerce and the American Farm Bureau Federation.

In all cases, the driver for these "strange coalitions" is the costs of effective new energy taxes and obligatory carbon reductions, loaded on to an increasing range of energy intensive and energy dependent industries, which all face a confused economic and financial future. Energy saving in agriculture is a case in point: taking a small fraction of all oil consumption in the US and Europe, no more than about 2%, forcing a high cost attempt at rapidly moving to green energy will be bad for the economy and will surely raise food prices.

In the US, the massive confusion of timescales, real problems, and unrealistic or harmful answers is now stark: the Obama administration, unlike the majority of EU27 political leaderships has rallied to the promises of shale fracture gas and slow-growing, high cost shale oil production. It has encouraged both US and European energy companies to crowd into US shale gas production, and big ticket gas projects outside the US, racking up a frenetic lease and concession-bidding war at a time when US gas prices are around 75% less than non-US pipeline gas and LNG. Also at this time, for a host of factors including the approach to peak oil, oil sector investing and spending has plateau'd despite record high prices, while both the Obama team and EU27 leaderships claim, and proclaim they must "save the planet" through massive spending on renewable energy projects that, if they matured, will only deliver serious quantities of energy in 10 or 15 years from now. The near-term oil saving potential is close to zero. The feared takeoff in oil prices on a 5-year horizon is made even more sure and certain.

The environment is likely the real loser in all this, again for a host of reasons. Some are perhaps unexpected, such as the environmental impacts of radically expanding global REE (rare earths) supply for a large range of green energy and energy saving technologies. Others, more basic, concern the water needs for biofuels, shale gas and shale oil production. Even apparent energy-and-climate savers like hybrid cars are on deeper analysis weak or negative performers, reflected by the massive fall in US government and other government purchases of hybrids. In the US, its GSA's buying of hybrid and electric models fell 59% in fiscal 2011 due not only to their cost - but unavailability of E85 maize based biofuel a fuel that’s 85% fuel alcohol, due to factors including water limits and farmers' crop strategy. Global biofuels output, an apparent 'silver bullet' for oil substitution, has stagnated in major part because of environmental limits on further scaling output, underlining again that oil demand side management will be the real and final solution.

By Andrew McKillop

Contact: xtran9@gmail.com

Former chief policy analyst, Division A Policy, DG XVII Energy, European Commission. Andrew McKillop Biographic Highlights

Andrew McKillop has more than 30 years experience in the energy, economic and finance domains. Trained at London UK’s University College, he has had specially long experience of energy policy, project administration and the development and financing of alternate energy. This included his role of in-house Expert on Policy and Programming at the DG XVII-Energy of the European Commission, Director of Information of the OAPEC technology transfer subsidiary, AREC and researcher for UN agencies including the ILO.

© 2012 Copyright Andrew McKillop - All Rights Reserved Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilising methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisors.


© 2005-2018 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.


Post Comment

Only logged in users are allowed to post comments. Register/ Log in

6 Critical Money Making Rules