Showing posts with label Electricity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Electricity. Show all posts

Friday, January 24, 2014

Get Positioned Now for the Next Great Natural Gas Switch

The Energy Report: Ron, welcome. You are making a presentation at the Money Show conference in Orlando in late January. What is the gist of your presentation?

Ron Muhlenkamp: The gist of my presentation is that natural gas has become an energy game changer in the U.S. We are cutting the cost of energy in half. This has already happened for homeowners like me who heat their homes with natural gas. We think the next up to benefit is probably the transportation sector.

TER: What is behind this game change?
"Natural gas has become an energy game changer in the U.S."
RM: The combination of horizontal drilling and fracking has made an awful lot of gas available cheaply. There's a whole lot of gas that's now available at $5/thousand cubic feet ($5/Mcf) or less. I live in Western Pennsylvania, and 30 years ago, Ray Mansfield was in the oil and gas drilling business, having retired from the Steelers. He said, Ron, we know where all the gas is in Pennsylvania; it's just a matter of price. If the price runs up, we will drill more. If the price runs down, we will drill less. Any way you slice it, we are just sitting on an awful lot of it.

Two years ago, we had a warm winter, and the price of gas actually got down to $2/Mcf. You saw an awful lot of electric utilities switch from coal to gas. Literally in a year, what had been 50% of electricity produced by coal went to 35%. The difference was made up with natural gas.

In transportation, the infrastructure to make the switch to natural gas has not been in place. We didn't have the filling stations or the trucks. Now, the trucks are just becoming available. You can buy pickup trucks from Ford Motor Co. (F:NYSE) and General Motors Co. (GM:NYSE) that run on natural gas. Furthermore, Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE:NASDAQ) has established natural gas filling stations coast to coast, every 250 miles on five different interstate highways.

Westport Innovations Inc. (WPRT:NASDAQ) has been producing 9 liter (9L) natural gas engines. Waste Management (WM:NYSE) uses 9L engines on garbage trucks and expects 8590% of its new trucks to be natural gas fueled. Westport has just come out with 12L engines, which are used for over-the-road trucks. I don't expect those engines to get adopted as fast as the utility industry made the switch to natural gas, but there has been a fairly rapid adoption in the waste management industry. I think we're on the cusp of a major trend.

TER: That fuel switching in the power industry has been going on since 2008. Is it still progressing at the same rate or is it picking up?
"The big switch is over in utilities. But we've barely begun the transition with transportation fuel."
RM: It's pretty much leveled off. In fact, there's probably a little bit less gas used than when gas was below $3/Mcf. The latest numbers I've seen show that we're running about 37% coal and about 3334% gas. Going forward, I think coal use will continue to decline, and natural gas use will continue to rise. The big switch is over in utilities, and it will be gradual from here. But we've barely begun the transition with transportation fuel.

TER: So the game has changed for the power industry, and the transportation industry is next. What other changes do you foresee in the future?

RM: We will continue to use more natural gas and less crude. Right now, for equal amounts of power, crude oil is priced at about three times the natural gas price in the U.S. That is too wide a spread to ignore, economically.

The Natural Gas - Crude Oil Spread
natural gas crude oil spread
source: Bloomberg

Incidentally, in Europe, natural gas is still at $12/Mcf. It's on a par with crude. Most European chemical plants use a crude oil base to make chemicals. U.S. plants use a natural gas base. Natural gas becomes ethane, then ethylene, then polyethylene and then plastic. So producers of plastics or the feedstocks for plastic in the U.S. now have an advantage they didn't have before.
"The natural gas price advantage will be with us in North America for quite a long time. It's huge."
In Japan, the natural gas price jumped from $12 to $16/Mcf just after the tsunami wiped out the Fukushima nuclear power plant. To ship gas from the U.S. to Japan, the cost of compression, liquefying and decompression is about $6/Mcf. Executives at U.S.-based companies like Dow Chemical Co.

(DOW:NYSE) are saying they don't want the U.S. to export gas because that would drive the price up. But domestic gas consumers already have that $6/Mcf advantage. Meanwhile, in Williston, N.D., the natural gas price is effectively zero. Producers still flare it because they don't have the pipelines to take it out of the area. So this price advantage will be with us in North America for quite a long time. It's huge. That's why we call it a game changer.

price of energy

TER: So how can investors take advantage of these changes?

RM: Well, any number of ways. We hold some fracking services companies, like Halliburton Co. (HAL:NYSE). We own a couple of drillers, including Rex Energy Corp. (REXX:NASDAQ). And we invest in the people who build natural gas export facilities, such as Fluor Corp. (FLR:NYSE), KBR Inc. (KBR:NYSE) and Chicago Bridge Iron Co. N.V. (CBI:NYSE).

I already mentioned companies building natural gas-fired engines, including Westport, which makes a kit to modify a common diesel engine. And because natural gas will require new, larger fuel tanks, investing in companies that build natural gas tanks is another way to play it. One of the disadvantages of natural gas versus gasoline or diesel is compressed natural gas takes about three to four times the volume to get the same range. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) takes about two times the volume.

Of course, compressed natural gas is stored in pressure tanks, so it takes a pressure tank of larger size. Fuel tank conversions have been almost as expensive as the engine conversions. 3M Co. (MMM:NYSE) has gotten in that business, as has General Electric Co. (GE:NYSE). There's another outfit called Chart Industries Inc. (GTLS:NGS; GTLS:BSX), which has already run a good bit.
"We want a foot in each of these camps because we're not quite sure who the ultimate winners will turn out to be, but we know what the product lines will have to be."
We want a foot in each of these camps because we're not quite sure who the ultimate winners will turn out to be, but we know what the product lines will have to be. Don't forget about the companies that own the LNG export facilitiesCheniere Energy Inc.'s (LNG:NYSE.MKT) facility should be up and running in probably 2015, but, again, that stock has run up a good bit, too.

Pipelines will benefit from the switch. One of the biggest pipelines in the country is Kinder Morgan Energy Partners L.P.'s (KMP:NYSE) Rockies Express Pipeline, which stretches from Northern Colorado to Eastern Ohio and ships gas east. Kinder Morgan recently filed to reverse the flow on part of the line. Right now, in Western Pennsylvania, we have a glut of gas. A few months ago, they reversed the flow of the pipeline from the Gulf Coast that used to come up to Western Pennsylvania. There's a whole lot going on.

TER: After some serious oil train derailments in recent months, pressure is building now to increase pipeline capacity, but there is also pressure on producers to reduce flaring, which is happening on a huge scale in the Bakken Shale. How will the economics and the operations of Bakken producers be affected if they can't flare and pipeline capacity is not increased?

RM: The Bakken is primarily an oilfield; the gas is a byproduct. We hear a lot about the Keystone XL Pipeline, which is meant to carry oil from the Bakken south. I can't speak specifically, but if you're going to lay an oil pipeline from the Bakken, you should lay a gas pipeline alongside it. You can ship oil by rail, but it's not economic to ship gas by rail. One way or another, the oil will be shipped.

TER: Bill Powers, the independent analyst and author of "Cold, Hungry and in the Dark: Exploding the Natural Gas Supply Myth," says gas prices are going to rise steadily to as much as $6/million British thermal units ($6/MMBtu) because U.S. gas production has peaked and now is now flat or declining. Do you agree with that?

RM: Our production of gas has not peaked and is not declining. We are using fewer rigs drilling for gas, but each well, particularly if you drill horizontally instead of just vertically, is producing so much more gas. Production is not declining and isn't likely to for at least a decade. At current rates, we can drill in Pennsylvania for another 50 years. Yes, you drill the best wells first but also, over time, you get a little bit better at timing this stuff. I'd be very surprised if the price in the next decade gets over $5/Mcf for any extended period of time because there's an awful lot of gas that's very profitable at that price. I'm willing to make that bet with Bill Powers. But even $6/Mcf gas would equate to $55/bbl crude, which is still a huge spread and wouldn't negate my general argument.

TER: What's your forecast for gas prices in 2014?

RM: My forecast is $4/Mcf, give or take $1. We just had a big cold snap on the East Coast. What used to happen is any time you had a cold winter, the price of gas jumped. For instance, in 2005, when crude was selling about $50/barrel ($50/bbl), gas began the year at about $7/Mcf, which was on par with crude, but in the wintertime, it doubled and ran up to $14/Mcf. The recent cold snap took gas all the way up to ~$4.20/Mcf. Gas is going to be in that range for a long time.

TER: Your advice to investors in natural gas is to get exposure to exploration and production companies, service companies and even LNG plant constructors. What about the LNG plant owners, the pipelines and the railroads?

RM: The pipelines will do well. They've already been bid up. The railroads will benefit from oil and gas, but they're getting hurt because coal tonnage is way down, CSX Corp. (CSX:NYSE) just reported. So for the railroads, it's going to be a wash. They'll haul less coal and more oil. The railroads won't haul gas. How much oil they haul is an open question. We're about to tighten restrictions on how tank cars are built.

TER: What did well in the Muhlenkamp Fund last year?

RM: The fund was up 34.4%. We did very well in biotech stocks. We did very well in financial stocks. We also did well in some energy stocks. Airlines did well for us. Incidentally, airlines benefit big time from cheaper energy, as you know. So it's fairly diverse.

TER: How are you adjusting your portfolio this year?

RM: Not too much has changed. We're no longer finding many good companies that are cheap. So we're monitoring and adjusting a little bit around the edges. We do think banks have further to go. We think the economy will grow somewhere between 2.53% this year. We've owned no bonds for the past couple of years, but with the Treasuries now, the interest rates on the longer end are high enough so that savers can get a little bit of return.

TER: I was surprised to see a really sharp drop in November for Fuel Systems Solutions Inc. (FSYS:NYSE). Why did that happen?

RM: Fuel Systems makes conversion kits for cars to burn compressed natural gas. In places like Pakistan, 40% of the cars run on natural gas; this is not new technology. A number of its customers decided to make these kits in-house. Fuel Systems is a small position of ours, but, yes, it got hit in Q4/13 when it announced that a number of its customers decided to produce their own kits. One of the nice things about this is there's no new technology involved. We've been using natural gas as a power source for generations. What has changed is the amount that's available reliably at a cheap price.

TER: There was another sharp drop in Clean Energy Fuels in October. What happened there?
RM: Clean Energy, so far, doesn't make a profit because it has been shelling out all the money to build all these filling stations. It's just taking a little longer than people expected. The stock is compelling at these levels. A number of these companies ran. Westport doubled, and we took some profits. It's now back down, and we should do a Buy rerating. There is volatility in this stuff, but the economics are undeniable. We still managed a 34.4% gain this year, which isn't bad.
"Royal Dutch Shell Plc is building natural gas fueling stations in concert with another truck stop operator."
Clean Energy has signed a joint venture with Pilot Flying J to build natural gas fueling stations at Flying J truck stops coast to coast. Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDS.A:NYSE; RDS.B:NYSE) is doing a similar thing in concert with another truck stop operator. For instance, the Port of Long Beach, Calif., passed a rule several years ago that the trucks on the port need to burn natural gas. The Port of Hamburg, Germany, has contracted to put a natural gas-fired power unit on a barge so that when cruise ships come into the harbor, instead of running their own power off their diesel engines and generators, they'll use this barge to supply power to the cruise ship because natural gas exhaust is cleaner than diesel exhaust.

TER: A couple of other companies had surprising drops Rex Energy and Westport Innovations. Rex rose all year until October or November, when it suddenly dropped. Westport also dropped suddenly. You had a wild ride in your portfolio, didn't you?

RM: We bought Rex at $13/share, and it went to $22 or $23, and it's now $19. I can live with that. The dips give you a chance to load up again. That volatility is why we have a diversified portfolio. That's why you don't just bet on three stocks.

As an investor, most of the time what you're looking for is to find a difference between perception and reality. Today, we have two realities: One is the price of crude oil, and the other is the price of natural gas. So it's literally an arbitrage if you can buy energy either at the equivalent of $100/bbl or at a third of that.

Four dollar gas is equivalent in energy content to about $35/bbl crude. So I can buy my energy either at $100/bbl or $35/bbl. Economics says that spread is too wide. It won't necessarily close, but it sure as heck will narrow a good bit. For instance, I own no conventional oil companies. I think the price of oil will be coming down.

TER: So what companies in your portfolio look most promising?

RM: If you really want to get me excited, we can talk about natural gas, which we've been talking about. We could talk about biotechnology, which is exciting but I don't understand it as well. We can talk about U.S. manufacturing, but that's basically based on cheaper energy. I just bought more Rex. At these prices, I'm buying Westport. I just bought Chicago Bridge. I just bought KBR.

TER: What is your main motivation in buying these companies? Is it just the stock price or is there something about the management of the company or the technology?
"I want to buy Pontiacs and Buicks when they go on sale. I don't want a Yugo at any price. I would like to buy Cadillacs, but they don't go on sale very often."
RM: We're in the investment business. What we rely on is good companies, and we look to buy them when they're selling cheaply. Our first measure of how well a company is run is we start with return on shareholder equity. So we like companies that are at least above average in return on shareholder equity. I cannot yet say that about Clean Energy, but we do think Clean Energy is at the forefront of something that's needed for this transition. We're always looking for good companies. Then the question is whether you can buy them at a decent price.

My phrase is: I want to buy Pontiacs and Buicks when they go on sale. I don't want a Yugo at any price. I would like to buy Cadillacs, but they don't go on sale very often. But if I can get Buicks when they're on sale, I'll make good money for my clientele. We think that the companies we have are at least Buicks. If we can get them at Chevy prices, that's when we buy them. I will not pay an unlimited amount for any company.

I've never seen a company that was so good it didn't matter what you paid for the stock. To us, value is a good company at a cheap price. Some people bottom fish. They look to see when they can steal companies, and there are times when you can make money that way. But at that point it's not often a very good business, and there aren't too many well run companies at bargain basement prices. So it's very unusual for us to buy a weak company or a weak industry.

TER: Ron, this has been a good conversation. I appreciate your time, and good luck with your Money Show presentation.

RM: Thanks; it'll be fun.

Ron Muhlenkamp is the founder and portfolio manager of Muhlenkamp Co. Inc., 


Posted coutesy of our trading partners at INO.com



Friday, August 10, 2012

EIA: Low U.S. Injections Reflect Already High Natural Gas Storage Inventories

The increase in U.S. working natural gas inventories nearly half way through the 2012 injection season the period from April through October when most natural gas is stored underground to help meet heating demand during the upcoming winter was the lowest in 12 years. The slow start to the injection season reflects record high inventories at the end of this winter, leaving less space to be filled, and a large increase in natural gas use by the U.S. electric sector for power generation. EIA estimates that, by November, working natural gas inventories will hit a record high, exceeding 3,900 billion cubic feet (Bcf). U.S. dry natural gas production was up almost 7% from January through May of 2012 compared to the same period in 2011, so natural gas injections have not shifted lower due to a downturn in domestic natural gas production.


The amount of working natural gas in underground storage increased 625 Bcf during April-June 2012, according to EIA's Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report. That is the smallest build since adding 564 Bcf, on a net basis, during the same period in 2000 (see chart above). While the increase in inventories is low, the amount of total gas in underground storage facilities is at a record high for this time of year, after topping 3,000 Bcf for the first time ever during any June month.


Monday, May 21, 2012

Warm Weather and Low Natural Gas Prices Dampen Spot Electricity Prices This Winter

E-Minis Unfair Advantage....Have You Watch This Yet?

 The combination of one of the warmest winters (November-March) in decades and low spot natural gas prices contributed to low wholesale electric prices at major market locations during the winter of 2011-2012 (see chart below). Warm weather kept electric system load low across the East Coast and helped dampen the need for coal fired generation. Natural gas generation was up significantly to take advantage of low natural gas prices. Reduced nuclear generation due to outages and reduced hydropower generation both served to moderate declining electricity prices in much of the country.
graph of Average winter price for wholesale on-peak electricity at major trading points, as described in the article text

On peak, wholesale electricity prices generally ranged from $20-$50 per megawatt hour last winter, with some exceptions. Electricity prices dropped during the winter, especially starting in January, as spot natural gas prices neared their lowest levels in the past decade.  

We are extending our “Trade Triangle Technology” 30 day trial and it’s only $8.95!

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Natural Gas Consumption Reflects Shifting Sectoral Patterns

Get Today's 50 Top Trending Stocks

U.S. natural gas consumption since 1997 reflects shifting patterns. Total U.S. natural gas consumption rose 7% between 1997 and 2011, but this modest growth masks bigger changes in individual sectors. Electric power is now the largest natural gas consuming sector and it shows perhaps the greatest sensitivity to price changes. The graphics below highlight key factors that influence natural gas consumption.

The electric power sector has the flexibility to shift some amount of baseload power generation, much of which has traditionally been fueled by coal, to underutilized natural gas generators without requiring additional investments in infrastructure.

graph of Annual natural gas consumption by sector, as described in the article text

Natural gas consumption for power generation is expanding. An earlier Today in Energy article noted that consumption of natural gas for electric power (or "power burn") has exceeded natural gas consumption in the industrial sector since early 2009. The power sector added a significant amount of new natural gas fired generating capacity over the last decade, much of which was in the form of efficient combined cycle units.

For many years, while coal fired generation was less expensive, those natural gas fired combined cycle units were used at relatively low rates. Recently, with natural gas prices declining and coal prices rising, dispatching natural gas generators in some parts of the country has become increasingly competitive with running coal generators. Competition between natural gas and coal appeared first in the Southeast, where coal fired power was more expensive due to the cost of transporting coal over long distances.

graph of Factors affecting natural gas consumption in the electric power sector, as described in the article text

In the industrial sector, natural gas consumption increased in 2010 and 2011, reversing a trend of declining consumption that lasted from the mid-1990s to 2009. Natural gas is used in the industrial sector and manufacturing subsector for process heating, steam generation, onsite electricity generation, space heating, and petrochemical processing.

graph of Factors affecting natural gas consumption in the industrial sector, as described in the article text


The downward trend in natural gas prices has lowered the cost of a key input for some industries. However, the short term flexibility to take immediate advantage of low natural gas prices is limited in this sector, because many manufacturers that relied heavily on natural gas as fuel or feedstock closed down or moved abroad in the late 1990s and early 2000s in the face of rising natural gas prices. For various reasons, some of the remaining firms may switch fuel to natural gas, and others may never switch regardless of fuel costs, leaving a wide range of dependencies on natural gas prices (see Tables 10.15 and 10.21 from EIA's Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey).

Domestic and global macroeconomic trends affect industrial activity, which is often tracked by industrial indices. However, some U.S. manufacturers (e.g., petrochemicals) that use natural gas derived feedstocks (e.g., ethane) are enjoying a competitive advantage while international competitors consume more expensive, oil derived feedstocks.

Residential and commercial consumption of natural gas is primarily for space heating, water heating, and cooking; the most influential short term factor for these sectors is weather (quantified here as heating degree-days).

graph of Factors affecting natural gas consumption in the electric power sector, as described in the article text

The residential and commercial sectors have limited short-term flexibility to take advantage of inexpensive natural gas, as heating systems can be expensive to modify and are replaced infrequently. Over longer timescales, the number of households using natural gas for space heating has increased, for example, in the Northeast, households are switching their heating fuel from heating oil to natural gas. However, the increasing efficiency of home heating systems (lower average gas use per customer) masks some of the effect of the increasing number of natural gas customers, even when normalized for weather.

Seasonal patterns in natural gas consumption appear in all sectors. Colder winter weather means more natural gas consumption for space heating, and warmer summer weather leads to increased consumption in the power sector with increasing demand for air conditioning.

This should create some controversy, when is the best time of day to profit?

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

EIA: Natural Gas and Renewable Shares of Electricity Generation to Grow

Over the next 25 years, natural gas and renewable fuels gain a larger share of the United States generating mix of electricity, according to the Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (AEO2012) early release reference case. Coal remains the dominant source of electricity, but its share drops from 45% in 2010 to 39% in 2035.

graph of U.S. electricity net generation by fuel, 1990-2035, as described in the article text


These results are from the AEO2012 Reference case, which assumes no changes in current laws and regulations. The full report will include additional cases measuring the impacts of alternative policies and different paths for prices and technologies on the electric power sector.
  • Annual generation from natural gas increases by 39% from 2010 to 2035. Eighty-five gigawatts of new gas capacity is added through 2035, as stable capital costs and low fuel prices make it the most attractive source of new capacity.
  • Renewable energy generation grows 33% from 2010 to 2035. Non-hydro renewables account for a majority of this growth, with wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal generation all significantly larger at the end of the projection horizon.
  • Coal's share of the electricity generation mix drops from 45% to 39% between 2010 and 2035. Thirty-three gigawatts of coal capacity are retired and only 14 gigawatts of new coal capacity already under construction are completed. A few factors disadvantage the relative economics of coal-fired capacity: projected low natural gas prices, the continued rise of new coal-fired plants' construction costs, and concerns over potential greenhouse gas emissions policies.
  • Annual generation from nuclear power plants grows by 11% from 2010 to 2035, but its share of the generation mix declines. A total of 10 gigawatts of new nuclear capacity are projected through 2035, as well as an increase of 7 gigawatts achieved from uprates to existing nuclear units. About 6 gigawatts of existing nuclear capacity are retired, primarily in the last few years of the projection.

Do you really understand the Fibonacci code?If not check out "The Fibonacci Tool Fully Explained"

Monday, December 12, 2011

Residual Fuel Consumption in the U.S. Continues to Decline

After reaching a high point of over three million barrels per day (bbl/d) in the late 1970s, demand for residual fuel oil in the United States has steadily declined (product supplied as seen in the chart above is a proxy for demand). Residual fuel is used as fuel for large ships and for electricity generation, industrial process and space heating, and other industrial purposes. Between 2000 and 2010, average annual residual fuel use fell from approximately 900,000 bbl/d to 500,000 bbl/d. It averaged nearly three times that in the 1940s and 1950s. As its name implies, residual fuel oil is the remaining fraction resulting from the crude oil refining process. Because residual fuel is a heavy product, it has limited uses and relatively high emissions.


graph of Residual fuel, U.S. product supplied, as described in the article text
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Petroleum Supply Monthly.
Note: Product supplied is a proxy for demand.
Download CSV Data

Changes on both the residual fuel supply and demand side of the equation are contributing to the downward trend.
Demand The demand-side landscape for residual fuel has changed over the course of the past few decades, particularly in the electric power sector. From 2000 to 2005, natural gas and oil prices tracked closely. Since 2006, the prices of these two fuels decoupled, as rapidly increasing supply drove natural gas prices down. As a result, the power sector began relying more on natural gas and less on residual fuel, except in circumstances where spot natural gas prices soared due to weather-related constraints. Other exceptions include Hawaii, which relies on residual fuel for much of its power generation (58% in 2010). To a lesser degree, Alaska and Florida use residual fuel, and in-city generators in New York City must use a minimum of residual fuel to meet reliability requirements. Other factors accounting for declining generation at residual-fired plants include: the availability of more efficient natural gas combined-cycle units, increased stringency of air emissions, and at times rising sulfur dioxide emissions costs.
Aside from the electricity sector, other major demand sectors, such as transportation, have not seen much change in residual demand over the same period. Residual fuel, often called bunker fuel in this context, continues to power large ships.
graph of U.S residual fuel oil deliveries by end use, as described in the article text
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Fuel Oil and Kerosene Sales.
Download CSV Data

Supply The supply of residual fuel oil from domestic refining has also declined. U.S. refinery yield for residual fuel oil dropped from 5.8% in 1993 to 3.8% in 2010. Refinery yield represents what finished petroleum products are made from crude oil run through refineries' crude distillate units and other downstream processes. Lighter petroleum products, such as motor gasoline and ultra low sulfur distillate, command higher market prices. Therefore, refineries focus their operations to maximize production of those products. By investing in more sophisticated downstream unit capacity, refineries can increase the amount of lighter products from each barrel of crude, and, as a result, lessen the production of heavier products such as residual fuel oil.
Due to rising gross exports and falling gross imports, the United States became a net exporter of residual fuel oil in 2008 (see chart below). U.S. gross exports of residual fuel oil increased steadily since the early 1990s. Additionally, after a sharp decline in gross imports from a high of more than 1,800 thousand barrels per day in 1973 to a low of less than 200 thousand barrels per day in 1995, gross imports have averaged about 350 thousand barrels per day over the last 10 years.
graph of U.S residual fuel oil deliveries by end use, as described in the article text
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Petroleum Supply Monthly.
Download CSV Data

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

EIA Launches New Electricity Focused Web Page

Yesterday, EIA launched a new web based report called the Electricity Monthly Update, replacing the Monthly Flash Estimates for Electric Power Data. This new product introduces a feature story, interactive graphics, a new presentation flow, and new electricity industry data sources.


Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electricity Monthly Update.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

EIA: Summer 2011 Electricity Prices Were Mostly Down Compared to Summer 2010


Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, based on data from SNL Energy.

Except for Texas, California, and the Southwest, average on-peak, wholesale electricity prices at trading points across much of the country declined during the summer (May 15 to September 15) of 2011 when compared to the summer of 2010. Wholesale power prices generally mirrored changes in wholesale natural gas prices. One stark exception was in the system operated by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) where extreme, sustained, widespread heat as well as insufficient capacity resulted in wholesale prices over 100% higher compared to the summer of 2010.
Electric system demand typically increases in the summer months as a result of residential air-conditioning demand. This increased demand usually drives up wholesale electricity prices compared to the spring and fall.
Some key drivers of price changes this summer included:
Weather: Mild temperatures throughout the Northeast and Central United States drove significant declines in average power prices in New England, New York, and the Midwest. The sustained heat wave in Texas resulted in record-breaking load levels. The map below shows the percentage change in cooling degree-days between the summer of 2010 and the summer of 2011, by state. Texas had a 13% increase in cooling degree-days, while Oklahoma and New Mexico had 15% and 13% increases, respectively. August 2011 was the warmest August recorded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for New Mexico, Oklahoma, Colorado, Arizona and Louisiana.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, based on data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Natural Gas Prices: Because natural gas is the marginal fuel for electricity generation in many regions of the country, natural gas prices can have a significant impact on the wholesale price of electricity. Overall, wholesale natural gas prices this summer were little changed compared to prices in the summer of 2010; wholesale natural gas prices at the Henry Hub in Louisiana fell about 1% to $4.30 per million British thermal units. There were some regional changes, however. In the Northeast, wholesale natural gas prices were down between 2% and 15%, reflecting both lower regional demands and growing natural gas production from the Marcellus shale play. Natural gas prices were about 4-7% higher than last summer in the Southwest and California markets and supported modestly higher wholesale power prices in those markets.
Hydroelectric Output: Power prices in the Pacific Northwest were driven down by the availability of inexpensive hydroelectric generation and mild temperatures in the early part of the summer. The average on-peak wholesale electricity price at Mid-Columbia zone (along the Washington/Oregon border) decreased 6% as hydroelectric output increased above five-year highs.