There are three investment
themes that will stand the test of time – energy, agriculture, and
healthcare. Why these three? There are several mega-trends at work currently that will impact these
three sectors of our economy and those outside the U.S. One is rapid population growth in the
developing countries and population decline in the developed countries. Another is the transitioning of societies
within the developing and developed countries, which impacts how humans live
and interact with their economies and ecosystems. I will address the energy sector in this blog
(Part 1 of 3) and agriculture and healthcare in succeeding blogs.
As I have mentioned in
previous blogs, there is portable energy and non-portable energy. Non-portable energy is energy that cannot be
consumed while in motion. Examples of
them would be nuclear (naval ships and submarines are exceptions), coal and
solar (panels have been installed on vehicles, but primarily to power an automobile's electrical system) and wind. Portable
energy would include petroleum and petroleum-related products and natural gas
(compressed natural gas – CNG, is beginning to be developed).
The reason that gasoline and
diesel are almost exclusively used as portable energy, is because the energy
per unit mass is far greater than any other practical fuel source (uranium is
the highest, but not used for public transportation for obvious reasons).
Source: http://www.schoolphysics.co.uk/age16-19/Mechanics/Dynamics/text/Energy_density_of_fuels/index.html
Non-Portable Energy
The world is changing
profoundly with regard to energy and energy consumption. Several forces are at work, whether we like
it or not. The first is carbon
emissions. A global consensus is
focusing on reducing carbon emissions.
Economies, corporation, and people are moving in lock step to reduce
their carbon footprint. They have heard
the message, so the global warming crowd should rejoice in the fact that it is
being done, though not as quickly as desired.
Natural gas production has increased over the past 10 years due to
hydraulic fracturing of productive geologic formations, thereby reducing prices
enough to cause a seismic shift away from coal to natural gas.
This switch is the major cause of carbon emission reduction in the
U.S. Should a carbon tax be applied, the consumer would be better served if the government were to tax carbon emissions, rather than let Wall Street capture the profit, though one could argue about the efficiency and utility of either.
Second, the Fukushima
Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster derailed the global nuclear
renaissance. While it is a bump in the
road for nuclear power, we will not likely be able to do without it. However, it is going to take additional time
to rebuild public confidence.
Third, clean energy (solar,
wind and hopefully others) is growing rapidly, despite it being uneconomic even
with government subsidies. High-cost
solar companies have failed, while low-cost Chinese solar companies have
succeeded and grown rapidly, causing solar panel prices to fall. This has made solar panel installation more
affordable, though paybacks are still years off.
Clean energy has not been without its critics, including
environmentalists. Even they have
criticized solar farms for disturbing desert tortoises and wind farms for
disrupting the migratory paths of birds.
We cannot have it all ways, especially when it severely limits economic
growth and job growth.
Fourth, the baby boom
generation is beginning to return to its 1960s-1970s roots from living off the
land to living off the grid. While this
is a minute percentage of the baby boomer generation, it is growing.
Fifth, energy conservation
is beginning to take hold. I find that
there is still low-hanging fruit to be picked.
This can be accomplished through new energy-saving products or
retro-fitted products with intelligent power devices that scale back energy consumption
or cut it off.
To summarize the changes in
electrical production and consumption or trends:
·
Carbon emissions
– down or moving lower in the U.S. (if anyone is to gain on this, it should be
government versus Wall Street),
·
Natural gas
production – up and prices down,
·
Coal production
– down and adjusting downward until steady state is met,
·
Nuclear power
generation – down or in steady state,
·
Solar and wind
energy – up and prices down,
·
Conservation –
increasing, and
·
Living off the
grid – increasing.
Utilities will evaluate the
energy sources available to them and their costs, before committing to major
capital expenditures. In Minnesota,
Duluth-base Minnesota Power long relied almost exclusively on coal
generation. Last month, it announced
that it would close one coal burner and convert two others to burn natural
gas. They would also add wind power and
hydro and probably a new natural gas-fired generator. The result will be to decrease coal
dependency over time to one-third coal, and increasing to one-third natural gas
and one-third renewable energy. Other
utilities will be moving in the same direction depending upon their input
percentages of resource availability, such as hydropower, geothermal power,
tidal power, nuclear reactors already in operations, etc. These are large shifts away from the traditional coal-fired power generators of yore and long over due.
Portable Energy
Gasoline and diesel are
still the major choices of transportation fuels, because of their higher energy density relative to other portable energy. Natural gas is being considered and promoted
by various entities, but storage and distribution remains an obstacle in
building out the infrastructure.
Oil
production is up in the U.S. due to hydraulic fracturing of shale and
sandstone. This new drilling technique
has been a panacea for job growth in North Dakota. While oil production has increased there and
else where, it has not returned to the high of 1970, when we produced 9.637
million barrels of petroleum per day.
The Energy Information Administration's (EIA) most recent data show that
production is down 41% from that high to 5.648 million barrels per day. This is barely above what we produced in
2003. Mileage mandates are needed to
close the gap. Additionally, other fuel
sources are needed to augment existing production, such as compressed natural
gas (CNG), hybrid technology, or the elusive hydrogen fuel cell. In any event, mileage mandates should
encourage the development of new technologies.
The oil drilling renaissance
that the U.S. has experienced, has created numerous positive outcomes:
·
Increased oil
production (EIA, from 5.644 million barrels per day in 2003 to 5.648 million
barrels per day in 2011, after bottoming in 2008 at 5.000 million barrels per
day),
·
Improved the
petroleum trade balance due to increased petroleum exports, which helped shrink
the overall deficit by 21% in December to $38.5 billion, the smallest in three
years, according to the Commerce Department on February 8, 2013),
·
Decreased demand
for foreign imports,
·
Created high
paying jobs from rig hands to engineers,
·
Lowered energy
costs (natural gas), and
·
Increased energy
security, causing companies like Dow Chemical and Royal Dutch Shell to build
chemical plants in the U.S. This could
be the beginning of a “reshoring” renaissance of companies relocating
manufacturing facilities and hence excellent paying jobs back to the U.S.
No comments:
Post a Comment