But if not, we could be in for a doozy of a bear market in the first half of 2023. This week we had more hawkish Fed talk on Wednesday, suggesting that rates will remain higher for a longer period of time....Continue Reading Here.
Showing posts with label yield. Show all posts
Showing posts with label yield. Show all posts
Friday, December 16, 2022
Stock Indexes Rejected At Resistance Signal Another Correction
Friday, July 8, 2016
Why the “Bond King” Is Having Flashbacks of the 2008 Financial Crisis
As you probably know, Great Britain stunned the world by voting to leave the European Union on June 23. The “Brexit,” as folks are calling it, triggered a selloff that wiped $3 trillion from global stocks in two days. The announcement also shook the currency market. The pound sterling plunged 8% the day after the news broke. It was one of the British currency’s worst days ever. The U.S. dollar, euro, and Japanese yen experienced huge moves too.
It’s now been two weeks since the historic event and panic is still in the air. Investors around the world have piled into government bonds, which are widely considered safe assets. Yesterday, the yield on the 10 year U.S. Treasury hit a fresh all time low. Yields on British, Irish, German, and Japanese 10 year bonds also hit record lows. A bond’s yield falls when its price rises. Investors have loaded up on gold too. The price of gold has shot up 8% since June 23.
This shouldn’t surprise you if you’ve been reading the Dispatch. Regular readers know gold is the ultimate safe haven asset. It’s preserved wealth through every sort of financial crisis because it’s unlike any other asset. It’s durable, easily divisible, and easy to carry. Its value doesn’t depend on “confidence” in any government. In other words, it’s real money. After its Brexit fueled rally, gold is up 29% on the year. It’s at its highest price since March 2014. Yet, this rally is showing no signs of slowing down.
The SPDR Gold Shares ETF (GLD) just had one of its best days ever..…
On Tuesday, investors put $1.3 billion into the fund, which tracks the price of gold. According to Investor's Business Daily, it was the fund’s third best day ever. It was also the fund’s best day since stocks crashed on August 8, 2011. Investors have now plowed $15.26 billion into GLD this year. That’s the most of any of the 1,931 ETFs tracked by global analytics and research firm XTF.
In London, the panic has gotten so bad that several fund managers stopped their funds from trading..…
The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday:
Henderson Global Investors, Columbia Threadneedle and Canada Life are the latest fund managers to stop investors pulling their money out against a backdrop of political and economic uncertainty following Britain’s vote to leave the European Union. The fresh moves by fund companies to suspend redemptions Wednesday came after Standard Life Investments, Aviva Investors and M&G Investments suspended trading on U.K. property funds earlier this week. This means that half of the 10 largest U.K. property fund managers have suspended trading temporarily.In other words, these managers have trapped their investors’ money to keep their funds from collapsing.
"Bond King" Bill Gross says something very similar happened just before the 2008 financial crisis..…
Gross is one of the world’s most well-known investors. He founded Pacific Investment Management Company (PIMCO) in 1971. Under his watch, PIMCO grew into the world’s biggest bond fund. Today, he runs his own bond fund at Janus Capital. Like us, Gross is worried about what’s happening in London right now. Bloomberg Business reported yesterday:
“It’s reminiscent of Bear Stearns’ subprime funds before the Lehman debacle,” Bill Gross, a fund manager at Janus Capital Group, said on Bloomberg TV. “The system doesn’t allow liquidity to flow into the proper places. If these property funds are just one indication, perhaps there will be others to follow. I think it’s something to worry about.”The collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008 helped set the global financial crisis in motion. The S&P 500 went on to plunge 57% in two years. And the U.S. economy entered its worst downturn since the Great Depression.
Government officials are scrambling to contain the crisis..…
Last week, the Bank of England (BoE) pumped £3.1 billion into Britain’s banking system. It pledged to inject as much as £250 billion to stabilize its financial system. And on Tuesday this week, the BoE announced more “stimulus” measures. It eased special capital requirements for Britain’s banks. Specifically, the BoE lowered how much money banks need to hold as a “buffer.” The move increases the lending capacity of U.K. banks by as much as £150 billion. Economists at the BoE believe more borrowing and spending will stimulate the economy. As we’ve shown you many times, this won’t work. Casey Research founder Doug Casey explains:
It’s part of the Keynesian view, in which spending and consumption drive the economy. This isn’t just wrong, it’s the exact opposite of what’s true. It’s production and saving that drive an economy. You have to save to build capital, and capital is necessary for…everything. What these people are doing is destructive of civilization itself.Still, this won’t be the last stimulus measure that the BoE rolls out..…
Last Tuesday, we said the BoE would likely cut interest rates. Two days later, Mark Carney, who heads the BoE, said the central bank needs to cut rates soon. The Wall Street Journal reported:
Mr. Carney said it was his personal view that the central bank would need to cut its key interest rate, currently 0.5%, “over the summer,” adding that an initial assessment of the economic damage caused by the vote to leave the EU would be made at the Monetary Policy Committee’s July meeting, and a “full assessment,” alongside new forecasts for growth and inflation, would take place in August. That suggests he favors an August move, while leaving the door open to an earlier decision.According to The Telegraph, the BoE could cut rates much sooner than August. That’s because the financial markets have “priced in” a 78% chance that the BoE will cut rates next week. But there’s a problem. The BoE’s key rate is currently 0.50%. In other words, it doesn’t have much room to cut rates. To stimulate the economy, the BoE will likely have to launch quantitative easing (QE), which is just another term for “money printing.”
The BoE won’t fix Britain’s economy by cutting rates or printing money..…
According to MarketWatch, central banks have cut rates more than 650 times since Lehman Brothers collapsed in September 2008. They have also “printed” more than $12 trillion over the same period. And yet, the global economy is barely growing. The U.S., Europe, Japan, and China—the world’s four biggest economies—are all growing at their slowest rates in decades. There’s no reason to think these easy money policies will work this time. It’s much more likely that central bankers will destroy the currencies they’re supposed to defend. Doug Casey explains:
In a desperate attempt to stave off a day of financial reckoning during the 2008 financial crisis, global central banks began printing trillions of new currency units. The printing continues to this day. And it’s not just the Federal Reserve that’s doing it: it’s just the leader of the pack. The U.S., Japan, Europe, China…all major central banks are participating in the biggest increase in global monetary units in history. These reckless policies have produced not just billions, but trillions in malinvestment that will inevitably be liquidated. This will lead us to an economic disaster that will in many ways dwarf the Great Depression of 1929–1946. Paper currencies will fall apart, as they have many times throughout history.If you do one thing to protect yourself from reckless governments, own gold. As we mentioned above, gold is real money—it’s the only currency that doesn’t depend on a government or central bank doing the right thing. For other ways to safeguard your wealth, watch this free presentation. We encourage you watch this video even if you don’t have a dime in the stock market. That’s because the coming crisis will hit you no matter where you keep your money. The good news is that you can protect your money if you make the right moves soon. You could even turn this threat into an opportunity to make a lot of money. Watch this short video to learn how.
REMINDER: Doug Casey will be in Las Vegas next week..…
Doug will be at FreedomFest 2016: Freedom Rising, an annual festival where free minds meet to talk, strategize, socialize, and celebrate liberty. Doug will be giving several speeches, and he’ll also receive an award for his new novel, Speculator. He’ll join a star-studded lineup of speakers that includes Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson, Senator Rand Paul, and Agora founder Bill Bonner. FreedomFest takes place July 13–16 at Planet Hollywood in Las Vegas. To learn more, visit www.freedomfest.com. Enter the code SALEM to get $100 off the ticket price.
Chart of the Day
Silver just set a new two year high. As you can see from today's chart, silver has soared 45% this year. On Monday, it topped $20 for the first time since August 2014. Longtime readers know that silver is gold’s more volatile cousin. Like gold, silver is real money. But unlike gold, it’s an industrial metal. It goes into everything from solar panels to batteries. Because of this, it's more volatile, and more sensitive to an economic slowdown than gold is.So, if you’re nervous about the economy or financial system, the first thing you should do is own gold. We encourage most folks to hold 10% to 15% of their wealth in gold. Once you own enough gold, consider adding silver to your portfolio. It could see even bigger gains than gold in the years to come.
The article Why the “Bond King” Is Having Flashbacks of the 2008 Financial Crisis was originally published at caseyresearch.com.
Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!
Monday, January 4, 2016
How Saudi Arabia and OPEC are Manipulating Oil Prices
About eighteen months ago the international price of WTI Crude Oil, at the close of June 2014, was $105.93 per barrel. Flash forward to today; the price of WTI Crude Oil was just holding above $38.00 per barrel, a drastic fall of more than 65% since June 2014. I will point out several reasons behind this sharp, sudden, and what now seems to be prolonged slump.
The Big Push
Despite a combination of factors triggering the fall in prices, the biggest push came from the U.S. Shale producers. From 2010 to 2014, oil production in the U.S. increased from 5,482,000 bpd to 8,663,000 (a 58% increase), making the U.S. the third largest oil-producing country in the world. The next big push came from Iraq whose production increased from 2,358,000 bpd in 2010 to 3,111,000 bpd in 2014 (a 32% increase), mostly resulting from the revival of its post war oil industry.
The country-wide financial crunch, and the need for the government to increasingly export more to pay foreign companies for their production contracts and continue the fight against militants in the country took production levels to the full of its current capacity. In addition; global demand remained flat, growing at just 1.1% and even declining for some regions during 2014. Demand for oil in the U.S. grew just 0.6% against production growth of 16% during 2014.
Europe registered extremely slow growth in demand, and Asia was plagued by a slowdown in China which registered the lowest growth in its demand for oil in the last five years. Consequently, a global surplus was created courtesy of excess supply and lack of demand, with the U.S. and Iraq contributing to it the most.
The Response
In response to the falling prices, OPEC members met in the November of 2014, in Vienna, to discuss the strategy forward. Advocated by Saudi Arabia, the most influential member of the cartel, along with support from other GCC countries in the OPEC, the cartel reluctantly agreed to maintain its current production levels. This sent WTI Crude Oil and Brent Oil prices below $70, much to the annoyance of Russia (non-OPEC), Nigeria and Venezuela, who desperately needed oil close to $90 to meet their then economic goals.
For Saudi Arabia, the strategy was to leverage their low cost of production advantage in the market and send prices falling beyond such levels so that high cost competitors (U.S. Shale producers are the highest cost producers in the market) are driven out and the market defines a higher equilibrium price from the resulting correction. The GCC region, with a combined $2.5 trillion in exchange reserves, braced itself for lower prices, even to the levels of $20per barrel.
The Knockout Punch
By the end of September 2014, according to data from Baker Hughes, U.S. Shale rigs registered their highest number in as many years at 1,931. However, they also registered their very first decline to 1,917 at the end of November 2014, following OPEC’s first meeting after price falls and its decision to maintain production levels. By June 2015, in time for the next OPEC meeting, U.S. Shale rigs had already declined to just 875 by the end of May; a 54% decline.
The Saudi Arabia strategy was spot on; a classic real-life example of predatory price tactics being used by a market leader, showing its dominant power in the form of deep foreign-exchange pockets and the low costs of production. Furthermore, on the week ending on the date of the most recent OPEC meeting held on December 4th, 2015, the U.S. rig count was down even more to only 737; a 62% decline. Despite increased pressure from the likes of Venezuela, the GCC lobby was able to ensure that production levels were maintained for the foreseeable future.
Now What?
Moving forward; the U.S. production will decline by 600,000 bpd, according to a forecast by the International Energy Agency. Furthermore, news from Iraq is that its production will also decline in 2016 as the battle with militants gets more expensive and foreign companies like British Petroleum have already cut operational budgets for next year, hinting production slowdowns. A few companies in the Kurdish region have even shut down all production, owing to outstanding dues on their contracts with the government.
Hence, for the coming year, global oil supply is very much likely to be curtailed. However, Iran’s recent disclosure of ambitions to double its output once sanctions are lifted next year, and call for $30 billion in investment in its oil and gas industry, is very much likely to spoil any case for a significant price rebound.
The same also led Saudi Arabia and its GCC partners to turn down any requests from other less-economically strong members of OPEC to cut production, in their December 2015, meeting. Under the current scenarios members like Venezuela, Algeria and Nigeria, given their dependence on oil revenues to run their economies, cannot afford to cut their own production but, as members of the cartel, can plea to cut its production share to make room for price improvements, which they can benefit from i.e. forego its market share.
It’s Not Over Until I’ve Won
With news coming from Iran, and the successful delivery of a knockout punch to a six-year shale boom in the U.S., Saudi Arabia feared it would lose share to Iran if it cut its own production. Oil prices will be influenced increasingly by the political scuffles between Saudi Arabia and its allies and Iran. The deadlock and increased uncertainty over Saudi Arabia and Iran’s ties have sent prices plunging further. The Global Hedge Fund industry is increasing its short position for the short-term, which stood at 154 million barrels on November 17th, 2015, when prices hit $40 per barrel; all of this indicating a prolonged bear market for oil.
One important factor that needs to be discussed is the $1+ trillions of junk bonds holding up the shale and other marginal producers. As you know, that has been teetering and looked like a crash not long ago. The pressure is still there. As the shale becomes more impaired, the probability of a high yield market crash looks very high. If that market crashes, what happens to oil? Wouldn’t there be feedback effects between the oil and the crashing junk market, with a final sudden shutdown of marginal production? Could this be the catalyst for a quick reversal of oil price?
The strategic interests, primarily of the U.S. and Saudi Arabia; the Saudis have strategically decided to go all in to maintain their market share by maximizing oil production, even though the effect on prices is to drive them down even further. In the near term, they have substantial reserves to cover any budget shortfalls due to low prices. More importantly, in the intermediate term, they want to force marginal producers out of business and damage Iran’s hopes of reaping a windfall due to the lifting of sanctions. This is something they have in common with the strategic interests of the U.S. which also include damaging the capabilities of Russia and ISIS. It’s certainly complicated sorting out the projected knock-on effects, but no doubt they are there and very important.
I’ll Show You How Great I Am
Moreover, despite a more than 50% decline in its oil revenues, the International Monetary Fund has maintained Saudi Arabia’s economy to grow at 3.5% for 2015, buoyed by increasing government spending and oil production. According to data by Deutsche Bank and IMF; in order to balance its fiscal books, Saudi Arabia needs an oil price of$105. But the petroleum sector only accounts for 45% of its GDP, and as of June 2015, according to the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency, the country had combined foreign reserves of $650 billion. The only challenge for Saudi Arabia is to introduce slight taxes to balance its fiscal books. As for the balance of payments deficit; the country has asserted its will to depend on its reserves for the foreseeable future.
Conclusion
The above are some of the advantages which only Saudi Arabia and a couple of other GCC members in the OPEC enjoy, which will help them sustain their strategy even beyond 2016 if required. But I believe it won’t take that long. International pressure from other OPEC members, and even the global oil corporations’ lobby will push leaders on both sides to negotiate a deal to streamline prices.
With the U.S. players more or less out by the end of 2016, the OPEC will be in more control of price fluctuations and, therefore, in light of any deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia (both OPEC members) and even Russia (non-OPEC), will alter global supply for prices to rebound, thus controlling prices again.
What we see now in oil price manipulation is just the mid-way point. Lots of opportunity in oil and oil related companies will slowly start to present themselves over the next year which I will share my trades and long term investment pays with subscribers of my newsletter at The Gold & Oil Guy.com
Chris Vermeulen
Sunday, January 3, 2016
A Half Dozen 2016 Stock Market Poisons
By Tony Sagami
Most of the “adults” on Wall Street are on vacation this week, and trading volume shrivels up to a trickle. That low volume is exactly the environment that the momentum crowd uses to paint the tape green. I call it the financial version of Reindeer Games.
However, once the “adults” return, the stock market will need to pay attention to the actual economic fundamentals and deal with facts—like, 2015 being the first year since 2009 when S&P 500 profits declined for the year.
I expect that 2016 is going to be a very difficult year for the stock market. Why do I say that? For any number of reasons, such as:
A strong dollar can have a dramatic (negative) impact on the earnings of companies that do a significant amount of business outside of the US—for example, Johnson & Johnson, Ford, Yum Brands, Tiffany’s, Procter & Gamble, and hundreds more.
Third Avenue Management unexpectedly halted redemption of its high-yield (junk) Focused Credit Fund. Investors who want their money… tough luck. The investors who placed $789 million in this junk bond fund are now “beneficiaries of the liquidating trust” without any idea of how much they will get back and or even when that money will be returned. Third Avenue admitted that it may take “up to a year” for investors to get their money back. Ouch!
The problem is that the bids of the junkiest part of the junk bond market have collapsed. For example, the bonds of iHeartCommunications and Claire’s Stores have dropped 54% and 55%, respectively, since June!
What the junk bond market is experiencing is a liquidity crunch, the financial equivalent of everybody trying to stampede through a fire exit at the same time. In fact, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned that blocking redemptions could lead to an increase in redemption requests at similar funds.
Every single one of the 17 Federal Reserve members expects the fed funds rate to increase by at least 50 bps before the end of 2016, and 10 of the 17 expect rates to rise at least 100 bps higher in the next 12 months. I doubt our already struggling economy could handle those increases.
I don’t give the Republican led Congress a free pass either, as I have no faith that it will put the best interests of the US ahead of its desire to fight Obama.
However, I think the biggest danger is an explosion of non-performing loans in China. Debt levels in China, both public and private, have exploded, and I continue to hear anecdotal evidence that default and non-performing loans are on the rise.
Tony Sagami
30 year market expert Tony Sagami leads the Yield Shark and Rational Bear advisories at Mauldin Economics. To learn more about Yield Shark and how it helps you maximize dividend income, click here.
To learn more about Rational Bear and how you can use it to benefit from falling stocks and sectors, click here.
However, once the “adults” return, the stock market will need to pay attention to the actual economic fundamentals and deal with facts—like, 2015 being the first year since 2009 when S&P 500 profits declined for the year.
I expect that 2016 is going to be a very difficult year for the stock market. Why do I say that? For any number of reasons, such as:
Poison #1: The Strong US Dollar
The greenback has been red hot. The US dollar index is up 9% in 2015 after gaining 13% in 2014.A strong dollar can have a dramatic (negative) impact on the earnings of companies that do a significant amount of business outside of the US—for example, Johnson & Johnson, Ford, Yum Brands, Tiffany’s, Procter & Gamble, and hundreds more.
Poison #2: Depressed Energy Prices
I don’t have to tell you that oil prices have fallen like a rock. That’s a blessing when you stop at a gas station, but the impact on the finances of petro dependent economies, including certain US states, has been devastating. Plunging energy prices are going to clobber everything from emerging markets to energy stocks, to states like North Dakota and Texas.Poison #3: Junk Bond Implosion
You may not have noticed because the decline has been orderly, but the junk bond market is on the verge of a total meltdown.Third Avenue Management unexpectedly halted redemption of its high-yield (junk) Focused Credit Fund. Investors who want their money… tough luck. The investors who placed $789 million in this junk bond fund are now “beneficiaries of the liquidating trust” without any idea of how much they will get back and or even when that money will be returned. Third Avenue admitted that it may take “up to a year” for investors to get their money back. Ouch!
The problem is that the bids of the junkiest part of the junk bond market have collapsed. For example, the bonds of iHeartCommunications and Claire’s Stores have dropped 54% and 55%, respectively, since June!
What the junk bond market is experiencing is a liquidity crunch, the financial equivalent of everybody trying to stampede through a fire exit at the same time. In fact, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned that blocking redemptions could lead to an increase in redemption requests at similar funds.
Poison #4: Rising Interest Rates
As expected, the Federal Reserve hiked interest rates at its last meeting. The reaction (so far) hasn’t been too negative; however, we may have several more interest rate hikes coming our way.Every single one of the 17 Federal Reserve members expects the fed funds rate to increase by at least 50 bps before the end of 2016, and 10 of the 17 expect rates to rise at least 100 bps higher in the next 12 months. I doubt our already struggling economy could handle those increases.
Poison #5: Government Interference
Sure, 2016 is an election year, which brings uncertainty and possibly turmoil. But the Obama administration could shove several changes down America’s throat via executive action—such as higher minimum wage, limits on drug pricing, gun control, trade sanctions including tariffs, immigration, climate change, and increased business regulation.I don’t give the Republican led Congress a free pass either, as I have no faith that it will put the best interests of the US ahead of its desire to fight Obama.
Poison #6: China Contagion
We do indeed live in a small, interconnected world, and it’s quite possible that something outside of the US could send our stock market tumbling. Middle East challenges notwithstanding, the one external shock I worry the most about is one coming from China. The sudden devaluation of the yuan and the significant easing of monetary policy by the People’s Bank of China are signs that trouble is brewing.However, I think the biggest danger is an explosion of non-performing loans in China. Debt levels in China, both public and private, have exploded, and I continue to hear anecdotal evidence that default and non-performing loans are on the rise.
Conclusion
To be truthful, I have no idea which of the above or maybe even something completely out of left field will poison the stock market in 2016, but I am convinced that trouble is coming. Call me a pessimist, a bear, or an idiot… but my personal portfolio and that of my Rational Bear subscribers are prepared to profit from falling stock prices.Tony Sagami
30 year market expert Tony Sagami leads the Yield Shark and Rational Bear advisories at Mauldin Economics. To learn more about Yield Shark and how it helps you maximize dividend income, click here.
To learn more about Rational Bear and how you can use it to benefit from falling stocks and sectors, click here.
The article Connecting the Dots: A Half Dozen 2016 Stock Market Poisons was originally published at mauldineconomics.com.
Get out latest FREE eBooK "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here
Thursday, October 15, 2015
This Unique Oil Stock is Offering A Huge Dividend Yield
By Justin Spittler
One of Casey Research's biggest calls this year is paying off.....…In early August, E.B. Tucker, editor of The Casey Report, told subscribers how to profit from the world’s oversupply of oil. If you read financial newspapers for more than a week, you’ll notice that global oil production is near record highs. Last year, global oil output reached its highest level in at least twenty five years, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
High oil prices were a big reason for the surge in production. Between 2011 and mid 2014, the price of oil hovered around $90/barrel. But oil peaked at $106 last June, and it’s been falling ever since. Today, a barrel of oil goes for about $45. Even though the price of oil has been cut in half, global oil production is still near all time highs. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), a cartel of 12 oil producing nations, is still pumping a record amount of oil. And it plans to increase production next year. In the U.S., oil supplies are still about 100 million barrels above their five year average.
E.B. explains why some countries have no choice but to keep pumping oil.....
Oil is the foundation of many countries’ economies. Take Venezuela, for example. Venezuela produces over 2.5 million barrels per day (BPD) of oil. Oil exports make up half of the country’s economic output. The country is so dependent on oil that cutting production would be economic suicide. This is happening across the globe. Giant state run oil companies continue to pump because it’s the only way for these countries to make money. This is why global oil production has not fallen even though the price of oil has been cut in half. In many areas, production has actually increased.
Weak oil prices have hammered virtually all oil companies…including the biggest oil companies on the planet. Profits for ExxonMobil (XOM), the largest U.S. oil company, fell 52% during the second quarter due to weak oil prices. Its stock is now down 24% since oil peaked last summer. Chevron (CVX), America’s second biggest oil company, earned its lowest profit in twelve years during the second quarter. Its stock price is down 34% since last summer’s peak. The entire industry is struggling. XOP, an ETF that holds the largest oil explorers and producers, has dropped 52% over the same period.
But oil tanker companies are making more money than they have in seven years...…
Unlike oil producers, oil tanker companies don’t need high oil prices to make big profits. That’s because they make money based on how much oil they move. Their revenues aren’t directly tied to the price of oil.
On Monday, Bloomberg Business explained why oil tankers are making the most money they’ve made in years. The world’s biggest crude oil tankers earned more than $100,000 a day for the first time since 2008. Ships hauling two million barrel cargoes of Saudi Arabian crude to Japan, a benchmark route, earned $104,256 a day, a level last seen in July 2008, according to data on Friday from the Baltic Exchange in London. The rate was a 13 percent gain from Thursday.
On August 13, E.B. Tucker told readers of The Casey Report about a company called Euronav (EURN).
According to E.B., Euronav is the best oil tanker company in the world. The company has one of the newest and largest fleets on the planet. Euronav’s sales more than doubled during the first half of the year.
The company’s EBITDA (earnings before taxes, interest, and accounting charges) quadrupled. And because Euronav’s policy is to pay out at least 80% of its profits as dividends, the company doubled its dividend payment last quarter.
Investors who acted on E.B.’s recommendation have already pocketed a 5% quarterly dividend. Based on its last two dividends, Euronav is paying an annualized yield of 12%. That’s not bad considering 10 Treasuries pay just 2.07% right now. Euronav’s stock is up big too. It has gained 15% in the past month alone...while the S&P just gained 1%.
E.B. thinks Euronav is just getting started.....
Euronav’s stock price has rocketed in recent weeks, but it’s going to go much higher. Euronav is a great business and the economics of shipping oil are improving. The market hasn’t fully caught on to how good things are in the industry right now. Shipping rates are ripping higher, but the supply of ships can’t keep up with demand. The largest supertankers can carry 2 million barrels of oil at a time. They measure three football fields long. These ships take years to build and cost about $100 million each. Shipping rates should stay high as the world works through this huge oil glut.
It’s a great time to own shipping companies. And Euronav is the best of the bunch. Euronav has shot up since E.B. recommended it, but the buying window hasn’t closed. In fact, Euronav is still below E.B.’s “buy under” price of $17.50. You can learn more about Euronav by taking The Casey Report for a risk free spin today. You’ll also learn about E.B.’s other top investment ideas, including a unique way to profit from the “digital revolution” in money. Click here to get started.
The article This Unique Oil Stock is Offering A Huge Dividend Yield was originally published at caseyresearch.com.
Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
Recession Watch
By John Mauldin
“Growth is never by mere chance; it is the result of forces working together.”– J.C. Penney
“Strength and growth come only through continuous effort and struggle.”– Napoleon Hill
“We’re lost, but we’re making good time.”– Yogi Berra
I think it’s pretty much a given that we’re in for a cyclical bear market in the coming quarters. The question is, will it be 1998 or 2001/2007? Will the recovery look V shaped, or will it drag out? Remember, there is always a recovery. But at the same time, there is always a recession out in front of us; and that fact of life is what makes for long and difficult recoveries, not to mention very deep bear markets.
The problem is that our most reliable indicator for a recession is no longer available to us. The Federal Reserve did a study, which has been replicated. They looked at 26 indicators with regard to their reliability in predicting a recession. There was only one that was accurate all the time, and that was an inverted yield curve of a particular length and depth. Interestingly, it worked almost a year in advance. The inverted yield curve indicator worked very well the last two recessions; but now, with the Federal Reserve holding interest rates at the zero bound, it is simply impossible to get a negative yield curve.
Understand, an inverted yield curve does not cause a recession. It is simply an indicator that an economy is under stress. So now we are in an environment where we can look only at “predictive” indicators that are not 100% reliable. Actually, most are not even close. Some indicators have predicted seven out of the last four recessions. Some never trigger at all.
Recession Watch
All that said, looking at data from the last few weeks suggests that we need to be on “recession watch.” Global GDP is clearly slowing down, and the data we are getting from the US suggests that we are going to see a serious falloff in GDP over the next few quarters. I want to look at the recent (very disappointing) employment numbers, earnings forecasts (and some funny accounting), credit spreads, total leverage in the system, and the overall environment where credit, which has been the fuel for growth, is under pressure. The totality of this data says that we have to be on alert for a recession, because a recession will mean a full-blown bear market (down at least 40%), rising unemployment, and (sadly) QE4.
The jobs report on Friday was just ugly. Private payrolls increased by just 118,000, which is about the minimum level needed for unemployment not to rise. Government payrolls added 24,000. There were serious downward revisions to the last two months, as well. August was taken down by 37,000 jobs, and July was reduced by 22,000. The last three months have averaged just 167,000 new jobs compared to 231,000 for the previous three months and 260,000 for the six months prior to that.
My friend David Rosenberg dug a little deeper into the numbers and noted: Adding insult to injury and revealing an even softer underbelly to this report was the contraction in the workweek to 34.5 hours from 34.6 hours in August, which is effectively equivalent to an added 348,000 job losses.
So take the headline number, tack on the downward revisions and the loss of labour input from the decline in the workweek, and the "real" payroll number was [a minus] 265,000. You read that right.
While the unemployment rate remained at 5.1%, it did so largely because of a significant drop in the labor participation rate, which is not a good way to enhance employment. Further, the U-6 unemployment number is still a rather depressing 10%. Those are the people who are working part-time but would like full time jobs, as well as discouraged and marginally attached workers. Very few part-time jobs pay enough to finance a middle class lifestyle.
Earnings Recession
Leo Kolivakis of Pension Pulse has a downbeat earnings season preview, aptly titled “A Looming Catastrophe Ahead?”
Analysts have been steadily cutting 3Q earnings projections, and those revisions threaten to make some richly priced stocks even more so. Thomson Reuters data shows analysts expect a 3.9% year over year decline in S&P 500 earnings. Expectations are falling for future quarters as well.
These expectations have some strategists talking about an “earnings recession.” Just as an economic recession is two consecutive quarters of falling GDP, an earnings recession is two consecutive quarters of falling corporate profits.
The headwinds are no mystery. China’s weaker import demand is hurting all kinds of companies, especially raw materials and infrastructure suppliers. Caterpillar (CAT) slashed its revenue forecast and announced 10,000 job cuts. That probably isn’t playing well in Peoria. Accompanying the falloff in Chinese demand is an increase in the number of containers coming into the US as the strong dollar allows us to buy more and sell less. Not a particularly useful combination.
I love this quote from a Reuters story: “How can we drive the market higher when all of these signals aren’t showing a lot of prosperity?” said Daniel Morgan, senior portfolio manager at Synovus Trust Company in Atlanta, Georgia, who cited earnings growth as one of the drivers of the market. As we all know, it is every portfolio manager’s job to “drive the market higher.” Daniel evidently wants to do his part.
Sadly, despite our best efforts, the stock market faces an uphill climb. More from Reuters: Even with the recent selloff, stocks are still expensive by some gauges. The S&P 500 Index is selling at roughly 16 times its expected earnings for the next 12 months, lower than this year's peak of 17.8 but higher than the historic mean of about 15. The index would have to drop to about 1,800 to bring valuations back to the long-term range. The S&P 500 closed at 1,931.34 on Friday [Sept 25].
Moreover, forward and trailing price-to-earnings ratios for the S&P 500 are converging, another sign of collapsing growth expectations. The trailing P/E stands at about 16.5, Thomson Reuters data shows. Last year at this time, the forward P/E was also 16 but the trailing was 17.6.
The last period of convergence was in 2009 when earnings were declining following the financial crisis. The Energy sector is the biggest drag on earnings, meaning that we now see analysts everywhere calculating estimates “ex energy.” I suppose this produces useful information, but if we are going to exclude the bottom outlier, shouldn’t we exclude the top outlier as well? Healthcare is carrying much of the earnings burden for S&P 500 stocks, but I have yet to see an ex healthcare or ex energy & healthcare estimate. A funny thing about earnings: they’ve been going up for the past year, even as top line revenue has not. Generally, those go hand in hand. What’s happening?
And for the answer I have a story. A few years ago I made an assumption as to how a new stream of income would be taxed. I made that assumption based on my knowledge of having had similar income in the ’80s and ’90s. It turned out the rules had changed, and I hit the end of the year owing what was for me a rather large sum, as I was also trying to finance and build my new apartment.
I told my tale of woe to my accountant, Darrell Cain, who obviously detected the distress in my voice. He smiled at me and said, “John, I have an elephant bullet.” He reached under the table and pulled out an imaginary elephant bullet. “This is a big bullet. But I only have one of them. Once you use this bullet you can never use it again. If another elephant comes down the road, there will be nothing you can do.”
And yes, there were some one time tax maneuvers that reduced my taxes to a manageable number. But as he said, those were a one time option.
There is no way to prove it, but I think corporate accountants have been using up their elephant bullets this past year, as corporations want to be able to maintain the fiction that earnings are rising, so that price to earnings ratios don’t come under stress and cause stock prices to fall. You can move expenses from quarter to quarter, put off certain spending, recharacterize certain expenses one time, and so on. I deeply suspect we are going to find that some recent corporate earnings have been of the smoke and mirrors type.
Further, as I’ve written in previous letters, earnings forecasts are notoriously trend-following and typically miss the turns. If earnings are beginning to fall – and it appears they are – it is highly likely that earnings estimates will miss to the downside. If we slide into a recession at the same time, they will miss to the downside rather dramatically.
Is GDP Flatlining?
The Commerce Department will release its first estimate for 3Q US GDP on Thursday, Oct. 29. By then we will be in the thick of earnings season and will already know how many companies performed.
In the big picture, income (corporate or individual) can’t grow unless the economy grows. GDP may be a flawed way to measure economic growth, but it is the best tool we have. Blue chip estimates right now are that it ran at near a 2.5% annualized growth rate last quarter. However, the Atlanta Fed has sharply revised their GDP estimate for the third quarter down to under 1%. (See chart below.)
Will economic growth come into harmony with income growth? We know they have to meet eventually. At present, it appears GDP will stay in slow growth mode. That means it probably won’t be able to pull earnings up with it.
High-Yield – Rising Defaults
High yield spreads have been tightening and interest rates have been rising for some time. This is starting to cause some distress in the high yield (otherwise known as junk bond) market. My friend Steve Blumenthal has been following and timing the high yield market for 20 years. He recently wrote the following, which I’m going to blatantly cut and paste as it clearly depicts the level of distress in the high yield market.
If credit becomes more difficult to get, then growth is going to come under stress as well. I note that corporations that I think of as issuing higher quality debt are paying 10%. Thank you very much. Ten percent interest rates don’t seem to me to be very low.
To continue reading this article from Thoughts from the Frontline – a free weekly publication by John Mauldin, renowned financial expert, best selling author, and Chairman of Mauldin Economics – please click here.
The article Thoughts from the Frontline: Recession Watch was originally published at mauldineconomics.com.
Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!
Thursday, June 25, 2015
Commodity Traders, the Environment and How Nature Rebounds
By John Mauldin
The common meme in today’s world is that we are slowly (or perhaps even rapidly in some instances) destroying our global environment. Not just by way of global warming, but pollution, over farming, water usage, and increasing use of all sorts of resources taken from the ground. Post apocalyptic movies and books are the rage, showing us living in a world where man has ravaged his environment and our lives have been degraded if not destroyed. Our failure to deal with global warming and the destruction of the environment are key components of the mantra repeated by the mainstream media, pundits, and politicians.
Technology is supposed to somehow save us from our dystopian future by creating new ways to clean the environment, feed us, and help us become more thrifty and less wasteful. But when? When will we see those breakthroughs, that light at the end of the tunnel?
A few years ago I met Jesse Ausubel, who ran a two week long think tank for the US Department of Defense at the Naval War College, tasked with thinking about the challenges of the next 20 years. The Office of Net Assessment brought in 15 futurists from a number of disciplines and personnel from each branch of the military who were the heads of future scenario planning for their respective branches. We sat for over a week, 10-12 hours a day plus dinners, thinking through the issues we might have to face. Andrew Marshall, who was 93 and had been running that department since he was appointed by Nixon in 1974, gathered this group of nonconsensus thinkers each summer to think about long range issues. I was fortunate enough to be part of the group for two years.
Jesse corralled this herd of cats into a cogent work group and kept us on track. The experience was exhausting but exhilarating. It was soon clear that Jesse was not only capable of organizing a group of eclectic minds, he was also a first rate thinker himself, knowledgeable on a wide variety of topics, a true Renaissance man.
Jesse is Director and Senior Research Associate of the Program for the Human Environment at Rockefeller University, a pure-research institution with more Nobel laureates than any other university. The work they do is astounding in its breadth. I recently spent an afternoon with Jesse talking over a number of topics and especially a paper he recently published which lays out serious research in an accessible way on the subject of how things in our beleaguered world might actually be getting better. It is called “Nature Rebounds,” and it’s today’s Outside the Box.
To get the import of this paper, you may need to know more about who Jesse is. You can read his wiki bio, which is extensive; but the short version is that he was integral to setting up the first (and then subsequent) conferences on climate change in Geneva in 1979. Later, he led the Climate Task of the Resources and Environment Program of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, near Vienna, Austria, an East-West think tank created by the US and Soviet academies of sciences. Beginning with a 1989 book called Technology and Environment, Jesse was one of the founders of the field of industrial ecology. He also co-developed the concepts of decarbonization and dematerialization. He has more serious science attached to his name than most climate and ecological scientists do, and he has the awards and honors to prove it.
And what Jesse tells us is that for much of the world, in many ways, things are getting better. Nature is winning. Not everywhere, of course, and he documents the downside as well, notably the serious devastation of our oceans and fishing. There is still a lot to do, but the trends are positive (except, notably, for the oceans). He shows us that the effort to clean up the environment and expand the areas that are allowed to return to a more natural state has been worth it. This is a great summer read. The entire paper is included in today’s OTB, but if you would like to read it in its original format, you can download a PDF here.
I was recently in the wilds of New Hampshire and Vermont. I spent the weekend at the fabulous retreat compound of Gary Bahre, where some 15 people involved in his investments and businesses listened to Mark Faber, David Rosenberg, Ed Yardeni, Danny (David) Blanchflower, Peter Boockvar, Gary Shilling, and your humble analyst present and debate a series of economic topics. Trish Regan, now with Fox Business, moderated, kept things moving along, and displayed a very wide breadth of knowledge in her questioning. Those who know the characters involved will know that the event was, of course, cordial but also rather highly spirited. The theme song should have been “Hit Me With Your Best Shot!” I don’t get to be in many small group sessions like that, and I thoroughly enjoyed myself. My special thanks to Gary for being such a fabulous host. The place is now for sale, and I wish him the best, although I really would like to be a part of another conference like that again.
I have now moved to my temporary home base in the NoHo neighborhood of NYC, where I’ll be through mid July, in an apartment provided courtesy of AirBnB (I think). I have a business reason to be here, but on a personal level I have always wanted to spend an extended time in NYC. There is just so much to do and so many friends here. Randomly, I find myself in the same building with Nouriel Roubini. We’ve already scheduled to meet up in the next few days.
As a quick aside before hitting the send button, I was pleasantly surprised to find my photo in the New York Times. As I mentioned last week, I attended a small meeting with Governor Bobby Jindal. I wasn’t paying attention to whom the photographers were shooting as I talked with the governor. Somebody was evidently there to cover the event. New York has the potential for a lot of interesting dinners.
You have a great week.
Your happy to see the world getting better analyst,
John Mauldin, Editor
Outside the Boxsubscribers@mauldineconomics.com
Outside the Boxsubscribers@mauldineconomics.com
Stay Ahead of the Latest Tech News and Investing Trends...
Nature Rebounds
Jesse H. Ausubel, Director, Program for the Human Environment
Trends in America may portend a global restoration of nature, a rebound. To understand, let’s go into the woods, not in a far off kingdom, but only about 45 miles northwest of New York City in New Jersey, where a scary side effect illustrates the American trend to expand nature. In September 2014 a bear killed Darsh Patel, 22, a senior at Rutgers University majoring in information technology, while hiking with friends. Patel’s death in the Apshawa Preserve was the first fatal bear attack recorded in New Jersey in 150 years. Five friends were hiking when they came across the bear, which they photographed and filmed before running in different directions. After regrouping, they noticed one was missing. State authorities found and euthanized the bear, which had human remains in its stomach and esophagus, and human blood and tissue below its claws.Five years earlier, the state of New Jersey had restored its bear hunt. In 2010 wildlife ecologists estimated that 3,400 bears were living in New Jersey. After five years of hunting, the experts now estimate the population has fallen to 2,500. During the six day 2014 season, hunters killed 267 bears. Protesters have picketed and petitioned to stop the annual hunt.
Should the re-wilding of New Jersey shock us? I answer “no,” because about 1970 a great reversal began in America’s use of resources. Contrary to the expectations of many professors and preachers, America began to spare more resources for the rest of nature, first in relative and more recently in absolute amounts. A series of decouplings is occurring, so that our economy no longer advances in tandem with exploitation of land, forests, water, and minerals. American use of almost everything except information seems to be peaking, not because the resources are exhausted, but because consumers changed consumption and producers changed production. Changes in behavior and technology liberate the environment.
Farms
Consider first land. Agriculture has always been the greatest raper of nature, stripping and simplifying and regimenting it, and reducing acreage left. Then, in America, in about 1940 acreage and yield decoupled (Figure 1). Since about 1940 American farmers have quintupled corn while using the same or even less land. Corn matters because it towers over other crops, totaling more tons than wheat, soy, rice, and potatoes together (Figure 2).
Figure 1. Decoupling of US corn production from area farmed.
Data source: US Census Bureau (1975, 2012).
Data source: US Census Bureau (1975, 2012).
Figure 2. Domination by corn of US crops and meats produced in 2011.
Data sources: USDA; US Census Bureau.
Data sources: USDA; US Census Bureau.
Importantly, the average yield of American farmers is nowhere near a ceiling. In 2013, David Hula, a farmer in Virginia, not Iowa or Illinois, grew a US and probably world record 454 bushels of corn per acre, three times the average yield in Iowa. His tractor cab is instrumented like the office of a high speed Wall Street trader. In 2014 famer Hula’s harvest rose 5 percent higher to 476 bushels, while Randy Dowdy, who farms near Valdosta, Georgia, busted the 500 bushel wall with a yield of 503 bushels per acre and won the National Corn Growers Contest.
Figure 3. The transition to precision agriculture. Absolute US consumption of five agricultural inputs.
Data source: USGS2013.
Data source: USGS2013.
Figure 4. US uses of corn. *Note: Includes production of high-fructose corn syrup,
glucose and dextrose, starch, alcohol for beverages and manufacturing,
seed, cereals, and other products.
Data source: USDA Economic Research Service.
glucose and dextrose, starch, alcohol for beverages and manufacturing,
seed, cereals, and other products.
Data source: USDA Economic Research Service.
Figure 5. Sparing of land by potato growers: US potato yield, production,
and harvested area.
Data source: USDA 2013.
and harvested area.
Data source: USDA 2013.
Figure 6. Chicken wins market share in US meat consumption.
Data source: USDA.
Data source: USDA.
Wasted food is not decoupled from acreage. When we consider the horror of food waste, not to mention obesity, then we further appreciate that huge amounts of land can be released from agriculture with no damage to human diet. Every year 1.3 billion tons of food are thrown away globally, according to a 2013 report of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN. That equates to one-third of the world’s food being wasted.
Some food waste results from carelessness, but laws and rules regulating food distribution also cause it. Germany, the UK, and other countries are changing rules to reduce food waste. In California the website Food Cowboy uses mobile technology to route surplus food from wholesalers and restaurants to food banks and soup kitchens instead of to landfills, and CropMobster tries to spread news about local food excess and surplus from any supplier in the food chain and prevent food waste. The 800 million or so hungry humans worldwide are not hungry because of inadequate production.
If we keep lifting average yields toward the demonstrated levels of David Hula and Randy Dowdy, stop feeding corn to cars, restrain our diets lightly, and reduce waste, then an area the size of India or the USA east of the Mississippi could be released globally from agriculture over the next 50 years or so (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Peak farmland? Global arable land 1961– 2009 and projections to 2060.
In the alternative scenario, the several favors (rising yields, diet, waste reduction,
cessation of using land to fuel cars) sum to a higher total.
In the alternative scenario, the several favors (rising yields, diet, waste reduction,
cessation of using land to fuel cars) sum to a higher total.
In America alone the total amount of corn fed to cars grows on an area equal to Iowa or Alabama, as mentioned. Think of organizations like the Long Now Foundation turning all those lands that are now pasture for cars into refuges for wildlife, carbon orchards, and parks. The area is about twice the area of all the US national parks outside Alaska.
Forests
Let’s now turn from farms to forests. Foresters refer to a “forest transition” when a nation goes from losing to gaining forested area. France recorded the first forest transition, about 1830. Since that time French forests have doubled while the French population has also doubled. Forest loss decoupled from population.Measured by growing stock, the USA enjoyed its forest transition around 1950, and measured by area, about 1990. In the USA, the forest transition began around 1900, when states such as Connecticut had almost no forest, and now encompasses dozens of states. The thick green cover of New England, Pennsylvania, and New York today would be unrecognizable to Teddy Roosevelt, who knew them as wheat fields, pastures mown by sheep, and hillsides denuded by logging.
The forest transition, like peak farmland, involves forces of both supply and demand. Foresters manage the supply better through smarter harvesting and replanting. Simply shifting from harvesting in cool slow growing forests to warmer faster-growing ones can make a difference. A hectare of cool US forest adds about 3.6 cubic meters of wood per year, while a hectare of warm US forest adds 7.4. A shift in the USA harvest between 1976 and 2001 from cool regions to the warm Southeast decreased logged area from 17.8 to 14.7 million hectares, a decrease of 3.1 million hectares, far more than either the 0.9 million hectares of Yellowstone Park or 1.3 million of Connecticut.
Like farmed meat, forest plantations also produce wood more efficiently than unmanaged forests, and forest plantations meet a growing fraction of demand, predictably, and spare other forests for biodiversity and other benefits. The growth in plantations versus natural forests provides even greater contrast than the warm versus cool forests. Brazilian eucalyptus plantations annually provide 40 cubic meters of timber per hectare, about five times the production of a warm natural forest and almost 10 times that of a cool northern forest. In recent times about a third of wood production comes from plantations. If that were to rise to 75 percent, the logged area of natural forests could drop by half. It is easy to appreciate that if plantations merely grow twice as fast as natural forests, harvesting one hectare of plantation spares two hectares of natural forest.
An equally important story unfolds on the demand side. We once used wood to heat our homes and for almost forgotten uses such as railroad ties. The Iron Horse was actually a wooden horse—its rails rested on countless trees that made the ties and trestles. The trains themselves were wooden carriages. As president of the Southern Pacific and Central Pacific railroads in their largest expansion, Leland Stanford was probably one of the greatest deforesters in world history. It is not surprising that he publicly advocated for conservation of forests because he knew how railroads cut them. The US Forest Service originated around 1900 in large part owing to an expected timber famine caused by expansion of railroads.
Fortunately for nature the length of the rail system saturated, creosote preserved timber longer, and concrete replaced it. Charting the three major uses of wood—fuel, construction, and paper—shows how wood for fuel and building has lost importance since 1960 (Figure 8). World production has also saturated (Figure 9). Paper had been gliding upward but, after decades of wrong forecasts of the paperless society, we must now credit West Coast tycoons Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos for e-readers and tablets, which have caused the market for pulp and paper, the last strong sector of wood products, to crumple. Where are the newsstands and stationers of yesteryear? Many paper products, such as steno pads and even fanfold computer paper, are artifacts for the technology museums. E-mail has collapsed snail mail. US first-class mail fell a quarter in just the five years between 2007 and 2012 (Figure 10). As a Rockefeller University employee, I like to point out that John D. Rockefeller saved whales by replacing sperm oil with petroleum. ARPANET and the innovators of e-mail merit a medal for forest rebound.
Figure 8. Declining favor of wood products:
Global forest products consumed per dollar of GDP.
Data sources: FAO 2013; World Bank 2012.
Global forest products consumed per dollar of GDP.
Data sources: FAO 2013; World Bank 2012.
Figure 9. Saturation of world production of forest products, in tons; 1961 = 100%.
Data source: UN FAOSTAT.
Data source: UN FAOSTAT.
Figure 10. Dematerialization in action: Falling US mail volume.
Data source: US Postal Service.
Data source: US Postal Service.
Global greening
So far I have described bottom-up forces relating to farms and forests that spare land. Top-down forces are also at work, and together the forces are causing global greening, the most important ecological trend on Earth today. The biosphere on land is getting bigger, year by year, by 2 billion tons or even more.Researchers are reporting the evidence weekly in papers ranging from arid Australia and Africa to moist Germany and the northernmost woods (see text box, below). Probably the most obvious reason is the increase of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In fact, farmers pump CO2 into greenhouses to make plants grow better. Carbon dioxide is what many plants inhale to feel good. It also enables plants to grow more while using the same or less water.
Californians David Keeling and Ralph Keeling have kept superfine measurements of CO2 since 1958. The increasing size of the seasonal cycle from winter when the biosphere releases CO2 to the summer when it absorbs the gas proves there is greater growth on average each year. The increased CO2 is a global phenomenon, potentially enlarging the biosphere in many regions.
In some areas, especially the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, the growing season has lengthened, attributed to global warming. The longer growing season is also causing more plant growth, demonstrated most convincingly in Finland. Some regions, including sub-Saharan Africa, report more rain and more growth.
More nitrogen here and there in the environment may also be causing global greening. A group of us led by Pekka Kauppi of Finland is trying to dissect the shares attributable to the various factors.
In any case, the numbers are huge, and satellite comparisons of the biosphere in 1982 and 2011 by Ranga Myneni and his colleagues show little browning and vast green expanses of greater vegetation (Figure 11). I repeat that global greening is the most important ecological phenomenon on land today.
Figure 11. Global greening: Corroborating satellite images, models simulate greening
1990–2011 with growing net primary production spanning tropical, temperate,
and boreal regions and all vegetation types but also of course some areas with losses.
Trend is measured in grams of carbon per square meter per year.
Source: Sitch et al. 2015, fig. 6.
1990–2011 with growing net primary production spanning tropical, temperate,
and boreal regions and all vegetation types but also of course some areas with losses.
Trend is measured in grams of carbon per square meter per year.
Source: Sitch et al. 2015, fig. 6.
Materials
In speaking about land, I have occasionally mentioned materials such as nitrogen and water. Let me now suggest that in addition to peak farmland and peak timber, America may also be experiencing peak use of many other resources. Back in the 1970s, we thought America’s growing appetite might exhaust Earth’s crust of just about every metal and mineral. But a surprising thing happened, even as our population kept growing. The intensity of use of the resources began to fall. For each new dollar in the economy, we used less copper and steel than we had used before. Figure 12 shows not just the relative but the absolute use of nine basic commodities, flat or falling for about 20 years. In the 1967 film The Graduate, a successful businessman tells the new college graduate played by Dustin Hoffman, “I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Plastics” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk). About 1990, Americans began even to use less plastic. America has started to dematerialize.The reversal in use of some of the materials so surprised me that Iddo Wernick, Paul Waggoner, and I undertook a detailed study of the use of 100 commodities in the USA from 1900 to 2010. One hundred commodities span just about everything from arsenic and asbestos to water and zinc. The soaring use of many up to about 1970 makes it easy to understand why Americans started Earth Day in that year. I marched.
Figure 12. Use of nine basic commodities, US 1900–2010.
Note: Uses five-year moving average; legend is ordered top- down by value in 2010.
Data source: USGS National Minerals Information Center 2013.
Note: Uses five-year moving average; legend is ordered top- down by value in 2010.
Data source: USGS National Minerals Information Center 2013.
Figure 13. Absolute use of peaked commodities, US 1900–2010.
Note: Uses five-year moving average; legend is ordered top-down by value in 2010.
Data source: USGS National Minerals Information Center 2013.
Note: Uses five-year moving average; legend is ordered top-down by value in 2010.
Data source: USGS National Minerals Information Center 2013.
Figure 14. Absolute use of likely peaking commodities, US 1900–2010.
Note: Uses five-year moving average; legend is ordered top- down by value in 2010.
Data source: USGS National Minerals Information Center 2013.
Note: Uses five-year moving average; legend is ordered top- down by value in 2010.
Data source: USGS National Minerals Information Center 2013.
Dematerialization is no surprise to San Franciscans, who make the devices that replace the big old clumsy hunks of metal and blobs of plastic pictured on the right in Figure 15.
Figure 15. The smart phone as dematerializer, one small device replacing many larger ones.
Credit: M. Tupy 2012.
Credit: M. Tupy 2012.
Figure 16. Total US water withdrawals: absolute (ABS) and relative to GDP (IOU).
Withdrawals have been flat since about 1975 while production of corn
and soybeans has grown 300%, wheat 60%, potatoes 25%.
Data sources: USGS 2013; Williamson 2014.
Withdrawals have been flat since about 1975 while production of corn
and soybeans has grown 300%, wheat 60%, potatoes 25%.
Data sources: USGS 2013; Williamson 2014.
Figure 17. Rise, saturation, and decline of US per capita petroleum consumption,
1900– 2012.
1900– 2012.
Moreover, new forms of transport can enter the game. According to our studies, the best bet is on magnetically levitated systems, or maglevs, “trains” with magnetic suspension and propulsion. Elon Musk has proposed a variant called the hyperloop that would speed between LA and San Francisco at about 1000 kilometers per hour, accomplishing the trip in about 35 minutes and thus comfortably allowing daily round trips, if the local arrangements are also quick.
The maglev is a vehicle without wings, wheels, and motor, and thus without combustibles aboard. Suspended magnetically between two guard rails that resemble an open stator of an electric motor, it can be propelled by a magnetic field that, let’s say, runs in front and drags it.
Hard limits to the possible speed of maglevs do not exist, above all if the maglev runs in an evacuated tunnel or surface tube. Evacuated means simulating the low pressure that an airplane encounters at 30–50 thousand feet of altitude. Tunnels solve the problem of permanent landscape disturbance, but tubes mounted above existing rights of way of roads or rails might prove easier and cheaper to build and maintain.
Spared a motor and the belly fat called fuel, the maglev could break the “rule of the ton,” the weight rule that has burdened mobility. The weight of a horse and its gear, a train per passenger, an auto that on average carries little more than one passenger, and a jumbo jet at takeoff all average about one ton of vehicle per passenger. The maglev could slim to 300 kilograms, dropping directly and drastically the cost of energy transport.
Will maglevs make us sprawl? This is a legitimate fear. In Europe, since 1950 the tripling of the average speed of travel has extended personal area tenfold, and so Europe begins to resemble Los Angeles. In contrast to the car, maglevs may offer the alternative of a bimodal or “virtual” city with pedestrian islands and fast connections between them. Maglevs can function as national and continental-scale metros, at jet speed.
Looking far into the 21st century, we can imagine a system as wondrous to today’s innovators as our full realization of cars and paved roads would seem to the maker of the Stutz Bearcat. Because the maglev system is a set of magnetic bubbles moving under the control of a central computer, what we put inside is immaterial. It could be a personal or small collective vehicle, starting as an elevator in a skyscraper, becoming a taxi in the maglev network, and again becoming an elevator in another skyscraper. The entire bazaar could be run as a videogame where shuffling and rerouting would lead the vehicle to its destination swiftly, following the model of the Internet. In the end, a maglev system is a common carrier or highway, meaning private as well as mass vehicles can shoot through it.
The city air can be clean, too, if the source of electricity is clean. In fact, Americans have been doing a good job of decoupling growth and air quality. We already see not only decoupling but absolute falls in pollution. Emissions of sulfur dioxide (Figure 18), a classic air pollutant, peaked about 1970 because of a blend of factors including better technology and stronger regulation. The arc of sulfur dioxide forms a classic curve in which pollution grew for a while as Americans grew richer but then fell as Americans grew richer still and preferred clean air.
Figure 18. Decoupling of US economic growth and sulfur dioxide emissions.
Note: the orange Environmental Kuznets Curve of sulfur emissions,
which peaked in 1970,contrasts with the blue straight line of growth of GDP.
Economic slumps as in 1929 and 1944 reverse growth for 5–10 years
but do not affect the longer-term trends for GDP or emissions.
Data source: EPA. Credit: Waggoner and Ausubel 2009.
Note: the orange Environmental Kuznets Curve of sulfur emissions,
which peaked in 1970,contrasts with the blue straight line of growth of GDP.
Economic slumps as in 1929 and 1944 reverse growth for 5–10 years
but do not affect the longer-term trends for GDP or emissions.
Data source: EPA. Credit: Waggoner and Ausubel 2009.
Figure 19. Decoupling of US economy and carbon dioxide emissions.
2013 emissions were 10% below 2007. Carbon emissions seem around their peak,
especially by analogy with sulfur emissions.
Data sources: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, EPA. Credit: Waggoner and Ausubel 2009.
2013 emissions were 10% below 2007. Carbon emissions seem around their peak,
especially by analogy with sulfur emissions.
Data sources: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, EPA. Credit: Waggoner and Ausubel 2009.
Population
I have spoken about farms, forests, materials including water, and mobility. Let me report briefly on human population as well. The US fertility rate declined six years in a row beginning in 2008, falling to 1.86 births per woman in 2013, well below the replacement level of 2.1. Immigration will continue to keep the US population growing, but globally it appears that Earth is passing peak child (Figure 20). Swedish statistician and physician Hans Rosling estimates that the absolute number of humans born reached about 130 million in 1990 and has stayed around that number since then. With fertility declining all over the world, the number of newcomers should soon fall. While momentum and greater longevity will keep the total population growing, technical progress can counter the likely mouths. A 2 percent annual gain in efficiency can dominate a growth of population at 1 percent or even less.
Figure 20. Peak child? Population growth slowing at all levels of development.
Source: The European Financial Review 2013.
Source: The European Financial Review 2013.
Oceans
If only everything were trending in the right direction. I explore and observe the oceans a lot, and ocean life is getting a raw deal. Let’s think a bit about the form of meat called fish. Consider the change in the catch of a charter boat out of Key West between 1958 and 2007—no more large groupers (Figure 21). Or take a trip to the Tokyo fish market. Sea life is astonishingly delicious, and tastier and more varied in markets than ever, owing to improved storage and transport. An octopus from Mauretania ends in Japan.
Figure 21. Recreational fishing on the Greyhound charter boat,
Key West, in 1958 (left) and in 2007 (right).
Key West, in 1958 (left) and in 2007 (right).
Source: Census of Marine Life, History of Marine Animal Populations, and Loren E. McClenachan.
Fish biomass in intensively exploited fisheries appears to be about one-tenth the level of the fish in those seas a few decades or hundred years ago. Diverse observations support this estimate. For example, the total population of cod off Cape Cod today probably weighs only about 3 percent of all the cod in 1815. The average swordfish harpooned off New England dropped in size from about 500 pounds in 1860 to about 200 pounds in 1930. To survive wild in the ocean, an unprotected species needs to enjoy juvenile sex and spawn before capture.
Earlier I spoke about land meat. How does world consumption of fish that depletes the oceans compare with the 800 million tons of animal products humanity eats? Fish meat is about one fifth of land meat. In 2012 about 90 million tons of fish were taken wild from salt and fresh water and a fast-growing 66 million tons from fish farms and ranches.
Americans in fact eat relatively little sea life, only about 7 kilograms per person in a year. Much of that 7 kilograms, however, is taken from the wild schools of the sea, and that fraction of total diet, though small, depletes the oceans. The ancient sparing of land animals by farming shows us how to spare the fish in the sea. If we want to eat sea life, we need to increase the share we farm and decrease the share we catch.
Fish farming does not require invention. It has been around for a long time. The Chinese have been doing very nicely raising herbivores, such as carp, for centuries. Following the Chinese example, one feeds crops grown on land by farmers to herbivorous fish in ponds. Much aquaculture of catfish near the Gulf Coast of the US and of carp and tilapia in Southeast Asia and the Philippines takes this form. The fish grown in ponds spare fish from the ocean. Like poultry, fish efficiently convert protein in feed to protein in meat. And because the fish do not have to stand, they convert calories in feed into meat even more efficiently than poultry. Let’s say 80 miles per gallon.
All the improvements such as breeding and disease control that have made poultry production more efficient can be and have been applied to aquaculture, improving the conversion of feed to meat and sparing wild fish. In most of today’s ranching of salmon, for example, the salmon effectively graze the oceans, as the razorback hogs of a primitive farmer would graze the oak woods. Such aquaculture consists of catching small wild fish, such as menhaden, anchovies, and sardines, or their oil to feed to our herds, such as salmon in pens. We change the form of the fish, adding economic value, but do not address the fundamental question of the tons of stocks. A shift from this ocean ranching and grazing to true farming of parts of the ocean can spare others from the present, ongoing depletion. So would persuading salmon and other carnivores to eat tofu, which should happen very soon.
Cobia, sometimes called kingfish, widespread in the Caribbean and other warm waters, grow up to two meters and 80 kilograms favoring a diet of crab, squid, and smaller fish. Recently, Aaron Watson and other researchers at the University of Maryland Institute of Marine and Environmental Technology turned this carnivore into a vegetarian. A mixture of plant-based proteins, fatty acids, and an amino acid like substance found in energy drinks pleased the cobia as well as another popular fish, gilt head bream. Conversion of these carnivorous fish to a completely vegetarian diet breaks the cycle in which fish ranchers plunder the ocean’s small fish to provide feed for the big fish.
I have described fish farming in ponds, and much the same applies for the filter feeders, the oysters, clams, and mussels. With due care for effluents, pathogens, and other concerns, this model can multiply sea meat many times in tonnage. Eventually we might grow fish in closed silos at high density, feeding them proteins made by microorganisms grown on hydrogen, nitrogen, and carbon. The fish could be sturgeon filled with caviar. In fact, much caviar now sold in Moscow comes from sturgeon farmed in tanks in northern Italy.
The point is that the high levels of harvest of wild fishes and destruction of marine habitat to capture them need not continue. The 40 percent of seafood already raised by aquaculture signals the potential for reversal. With smart aquaculture, life in the oceans can rebound while feeding humanity and restoring nature.
The vegan extreme
Because California is the world capital of experimentation in cuisine, let me offer an alternative more radical than vegetarian salmon.We can understand that in a world of 7 billion human mouths aquaculture must largely replace hunting of the wild animals for many, maybe all forms of marine life. We are accustomed to the reality that even vast America does not produce enough wild ducks or wild blueberries to satisfy our appetite.
Back to basics, we depend on the hydrogen produced by the chlorophyll of plants. As my colleague Cesare Marchetti has pointed out, once you have hydrogen, produced for example by means of nuclear energy, a plethora of microorganisms are capable of cooking it into the variety of substances in our kitchens.
Researchers for decades have been producing food conceived for astronauts on the way to Mars by cultivating hydrogenomonas on a diet of hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and a little oxygen. They make proteins that taste like hazelnut.
A person consumes around 100 watts. California’s Diablo Canyon nuclear power park operates two 1,100-megawatt electric power plants on about 900 acres, or 1.5 square miles. The power of Diablo Canyon, a couple of gigawatts, is enough to supply food for a few million people, more than 2000 per acre, more than ten times what David Hula and Randy Dowdy achieve with corn.
A single spherical fermenter of 100 yards diameter could produce the primary food for the 30 million inhabitants of Mexico City. The foods would, of course, be formatted before arriving at the consumer. Grimacing gourmets should observe that our most sophisticated foods, such as cheese and wine, are the product of sophisticated elaboration by microorganisms of simple feedstocks such as milk and grape juice.
Globally, such a food system would allow humanity to release 90 percent of the land and sea now exploited for food. In Petaluma and Eureka, humanity might maintain artisanal farming and fishing to provide supreme flavorings for bulk tofu.
Conclusion
I do not expect 90 percent of exploited nature to be spared. But I do think that humanity is moving toward landless agriculture, progressively using less land for food, and that we should aim to release for nature an area the size of India by 2050. Overall I think the next decades present an enormous opportunity for what Stewart Brand and Ryan Phelan call Revive and Restore.People will object that I have spoken little about China and India and Africa. I respond with a remark from Gertrude Stein, who came from Oakland. Stein said about 1930 that America is the oldest country in the world because it had been in the 20th century longer than any other country. In fact, as early as 1873 America became the world’s largest economy, and since then a disproportionate share of the products and habits that diffuse throughout the world have come from America, particularly California. My view is that the patterns described are not exceptional to the US and that within a few decades, the same patterns, already evident in Europe and Japan, will be evident in many more places.
Now, rebound is not without challenges. We considered the black bear and the college student to begin. Later in the Long Now seminar series you will discuss the challenges of a woolly mammoth. But consider the fox (back cover photos). Fox experts now estimate that about 10,000 foxes roam the city of London, more than the double decker buses. Foxes ride the London Underground for free. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, became enraged when his cat appeared to be mauled by a fox, and perhaps because of the fare beating too. English snipers charge $120 to shoot a fox in your city garden.
Meanwhile in rural England, badgers are causing an uncivil war between farmers and animal protection groups. You know more about bobcats in California than I. So we have a new round of what journalist Jim Sterba has chronicled in a great book titled Nature Wars: The Incredible Story of How Wildlife Comebacks Turned Backyards into Battlegrounds.
I want to end not with complications but with inspiration, with examples of why we want rebound, re-wilding, why we want a rapprochement with nature, why the achievements of farmers David Hula and Randy Dowdy and aquaculturist Aaron Watson and their counterparts in forestry and water resources matter.
The incipient re-wilding of Europe is thrilling. Salmon have returned to the Seine and Rhine, lynx to several countries, and wolves to Italy. Reindeer herds have rebounded in Scandinavia. In Eastern Europe bison have multiplied in Poland. The French film producer Jacques Perrin, who made the films Winged Migration about birds and Microcosmos about insects, is working on a film about re-wilding. The new film, The Seasons, scheduled for release in December 2015, will open millions of eyes to Europe’s re-wilding.
As thrilling as Jacques Perrin’s films are, I propose the image of a humpback whale in New York Bight with the Empire State Building in the background as the most significant environmental image of 2014. Humpback whales and other cetaceans, perhaps even blue whales, are returning in large numbers to New York Bight. Recall the whale despair of the 1970s and consider that the Bronx Zoo has just announced a program together with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution to monitor whale numbers and movements in sight of New York City. Many decades without hunting and improved Hudson River water quality have made a difference.
Whether into the woods or sea, the way is clear, the light is good, the time is now. A large, prosperous, innovative humanity, producing and consuming wisely, might share the planet with many more companions, as nature rebounds.
Back cover photos
Fox in the wild (photo: Galatee Films)
Foxes in London, Underground (photo: Kate Arkless Gray) and near St. Paul’s (photo: Carine Thomas)
Fox in the wild (photo: Galatee Films)
Foxes in London, Underground (photo: Kate Arkless Gray) and near St. Paul’s (photo: Carine Thomas)
Sign up today and get each new issue delivered free to your inbox.
It's your opportunity to get the news John Mauldin thinks matters most to your finances.
The article Outside the Box: Nature Rebounds was originally published at mauldineconomics.com.
Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
