What is the economic impact of an oil price shock?

The economic news event of the weekend was the attack on the Saudi oil production facilities. It looks as though Houthi rebels and Iran were involved but forgive me if I am careful about such things along the lines of this from the Who.

Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again

As you can imagine there was a lot of attention on the London oil price opening last night and no doubt fear amongst those who were short the oil price. Their fears were confirmed as we saw an initial flurry of stop loss trading which can the price of a barrel of Brent Crude Oil go above US $71 which was some US $11 higher. It then fell back to more like US $68 quite quickly. For those unaware this is a familiar pattern in such circumstances as some will have lost so much money they have to close their position and everybody knows that. It is a cruel and harsh world although of course you need to know the nature of the beast before you play.

Thus the first impact was some severe punishment for sections of the oil trading market. The rumour was that a lot of quant funds were short of oil and we will have to wait and see if there is a blow-up here. If we move on we see that the oil price has been falling this morning leaving the price of a barrel of Brent Crude at US $65.50 or up over 8%.So let us start by looking at the winners from a higher oil price.

Winners

A clear group of winners and presumably the group who have taken the edge off the higher oil price are the shale oil wildcatters in the United States and elsewhere.

“Since the last in-depth review five years ago, the United States has reshaped energy markets both domestically and around the world,” the IEA’s Executive Director, Fatih Birol, said at the presentation of the report on Friday, accompanied by U.S. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry. ( oilprice.com )

If we continue with this analysis here is some more detail.

U.S. crude oil exports have soared since the ban was lifted at the end of 2015, to reach 3.159 million bpd on average in June 2019, according to the latest available EIA crude export detail.

As you can see the impact of the shale oil era had one underlying effect last night and this morning via the way that Saudi production is not as important as it was. But also there is the economic model of the shale oil industry which I have pointed out before is more of a cash flow model than a profit one. So I would have expected them to rush to hedge their production last night and this morning. As it happens these levels are ones which would be profitable for them as their costs are often around US $50 per barrel. However they will not be making as much as you might think as they would have impacted more on the WTI ( West Texas Intermediate ) benchmark which is about US $5 lower than the Brent benchmark.

Other companies in the production business will also be winners and we see an example of that as the British Petroleum share price is up 4% at 523 pence today.

Next comes the countries who are net oil producers. We have looked at the US already and the position for Saudi Arabia is mixed as it is getting a higher price but has lower production. Russia is a clear winner as its economy depends so much on its oil production.

Exports of mineral products (consisting mainly of oil and natural gas) accounted for 59.2% of total Russian exports in 2016 (Rosstat, 2017).

There is quite a list of winners in the Middle East including ironically Iran assuming it will be allowed to sell its oil. Then places like Kazahkstan as well as Canada and to some extent Australia. There is also Norway where according to Norskpetroleum it represents some 16% of GDP and 40% of exports as well as this.

The government’s total net cash flow from the petroleum industry is estimated to NOK 251 billion in 2018 and NOK 263 billion in 2019

Thus I am a little unclear how Oxford Economics are reporting that Norway would lose from a higher oil price.

There are quite a few African countries which produce oil and Libya comes to mind as do Ghana and Nigeria ( assuming the output of the latter can avoid the problems there).

Another group of winners would be world central banks especially the ECB after its moves on Thursday. The reason for this is that they have been trying to raise the inflation rate for some time now and either mostly or entirely failing as Mario Draghi pointed out on Friday..

The reference to levels sufficiently close to but below 2% signals that we want to see projected inflation to significantly increase from the current realised and projected inflation figures which are well below the levels that we consider to be in line with our aim.

Should this transpire then we will no doubt see a shift away from core and the new “super core” measures of inflation which for newer readers basically ignore what are really important.

Losers

These are the net oil importers which are most of us. In terms of economic effect the standard view has been this from FXCM.

Data analysed by the Federal Reserve shows that a 10 percent increase in the price of oil is associated with about a 1.4 percent drop in the level of U.S. real GDP.

The 10% depends on the actual price but that has been a standard with the Euro area thinking there would be the same effect on it from a US $5 move. Of course these days the US would see more offset from the shale industry and I think worldwide the advance of renewable energy would help at the margins. But a higher oil price leads to a net loss overall as the importers are assumed to fall by more than the exporters rise. Geographically one thinks of China, Japan and India.

The effect on inflation is unambiguously bad and let me offer a critique of the central banking view above. The impact of inflation on real wages will make workers and consumers worse and not better off reminding us that central bankers have long since decoupled from reality.

Comment

There are a couple of perspectives here. The first is that in any warlike situation the truth is the first casualty. This leads to a situation where we do not know how long Saudi oil output will be reduced for, which means that we do not know how long there will be an upwards push on the oil price. Next comes a situation where looking ahead there will be fears that attacks like this could happen again. That is in some way illogical as defences will no doubt be improved but is part of human nature especially as we now know how concentrated the production facilities are in Saudi Arabia.

Another perspective is provided by the fact that the oil price is back to where it was in May and some of July.

Oh and central bankers used to respond to this sort of thing with interest-rate increases whereas later this week we are expecting an interest-rate cut from the US Federal Reserve. How times change…..

Podcast

Thank you to those of you who have supported this as the listener numbers on Soundcloud on Saturday alone exceeded any previous week..

 

Are we on the road to a US $100 oil price?

As Easter ends – and one which was simply glorious in London – those of us reacquainting ourselves with financial markets will see one particular change. That is the price of crude oil as the Financial Times explains.

Crude rose to a five-month high on Tuesday, as Washington’s decision to end sanctions waivers on Iranian oil imports buoyed oil markets for a second day.  Brent, the international oil benchmark, rose 0.8 per cent to $74.64 in early European trading, adding to gains on Monday to reach its highest level since early November. West Texas Intermediate, the US marker, increased 0.9 per cent to $66.13.

If we look for some more detail on the likely causes we see this.

The moves came after the Trump administration announced the end of waivers from US sanctions granted to India, China, Japan, South Korea and Turkey. Oil prices jumped despite the White House insisting that it had worked with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to ensure sufficient supply to offset the loss of Iranian exports. Goldman Sachs said the timing of the sanctions tightening was “much more sudden” than expected, but it played down the longer-term impact on the market.

 

So we see that President Trump has been involved and that seems to be something of a volte face from the time when the Donald told us this on the 25th of February.

Oil prices getting too high. OPEC, please relax and take it easy. World cannot take a price hike – fragile! ( @realDonaldTrunp)

After that tweet the oil price was around ten dollars lower than now. If we look back to November 7th last year then the Donald was playing a very different tune to now.

“I gave some countries a break on the oil,” Trump said during a lengthy, wide-ranging press conference the day after Republicans lost control of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections. “I did it a little bit because they really asked for some help, but I really did it because I don’t want to drive oil prices up to $100 a barrel or $150 a barrel, because I’m driving them down.”

“If you look at oil prices they’ve come down very substantially over the last couple of months,” Trump said. “That’s because of me. Because you have a monopoly called OPEC, and I don’t like that monopoly.” ( CNBC)

If we stay with this issue we see that he has seemingly switched quite quickly from exerting a downwards influence on the oil price to an upwards one. As he is bothered about the US economy right now sooner or later it will occur to him that higher oil prices help some of it but hinder more.

Shale Oil

Back on February 19th Reuters summarised the parts of the US economy which benefit from a higher oil price.

U.S. oil output from seven major shale formations is expected to rise 84,000 barrels per day (bpd) in March to a record of about 8.4 million bpd, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said in a monthly report on Tuesday……..A shale revolution has helped boost the United States to the position of world’s biggest crude oil producer, ahead of Saudi Arabia and Russia. Overall crude production has climbed to a weekly record of 11.9 million bpd.

Thus the US is a major producer and the old era has moved on to some extent as the old era producers as I suppose shown by the Dallas TV series in the past has been reduced in importance by the shale oil wildcatters. They operate differently as I have pointed out before that they are financed with cheap money provided by the QE era and have something of a cash flow model and can operate with a base around US $50. So right now they will be doing rather well.

Also it is not only oil these days.

Meanwhile, U.S. natural gas output was projected to increase to a record 77.9 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd) in March. That would be up more than 0.8 bcfd over the February forecast and mark the 14th consecutive monthly increase.

Gas production was about 65.5 bcfd in March last year.

Reinforcing my view that this area has a different business model to the ordinary was this from Reuters earlier this month.

Spot prices at the Waha hub fell to minus $3.38 per million British thermal units for Wednesday from minus 2 cents for Tuesday, according to data from the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE). That easily beat the prior all-time next-day low of minus $1.99 for March 29.

Prices have been negative in the real-time or next-day market since March 22, meaning drillers have had to pay those with pipeline capacity to take the gas.

So we have negative gas prices to go with negative interest-rates, bond yields and profits for companies listing on the stock exchange as we mull what will go negative next?

Economic Impact on Texas

Back in 2015 Dr Ray Perlman looked at the impact of a lower oil price ( below US $50) would have on Texas.

To put the situation in perspective, based on the current situation, I am projecting that oil prices will likely lead to a loss of 150,000-175,000 Texas jobs next year when all factors and multiplier effects are considered.  Overall job growth in the state would be diminished, but not eliminated.  Texas gained over 400,000 jobs last year, and I am estimating that the rate of growth will slow to something in the 200,000-225,000 per year range.

Moving wider a higher oil price benefits US GDP directly via next exports and economic output or GDP and the reverse from a lower one. We do get something if a J-Curve style effect as the adverse impact on consumers via real wages and business budgets will come in with a lag.

The World

The situation here is covered to some extent by this from the Financial Times.

In currency markets, the Norwegian krone and Canadian dollar both rose against the US dollar as currencies of oil-exporting countries gained.

There is a deeper impact in the Middle East as for example there has been a lot of doubt about the finances of Saudi Arabia for example. This led to the recent Aramco bond issue ( US $12 billion) which can be seen as finance for the country although ironically dollars are now flowing into Saudi as fast as it pumps its oil out.

The stereotype these days for the other side of the coin is India and the Economic Times pretty much explained why a week ago.

A late surge in oil prices is expected to increase India’s oil import bill to its five-year high. As per estimates, India could close 2018-19 with crude import bill shooting to $115 billion, a growth of 30 per cent over 2017-18’s $88 billion.

This adds to India’s import bill and reduces GDP although it also adds to inflationary pressure and also perhaps pressure on the Reserve Bank of India which has cut interest-rates twice this year already. The European example is France which according to the EIA imports some 55 million tonnes of oil and net around 43 billion cubic meters of natural gas. It does offset this to some extent by exporting electricity from its heavy investment in nuclear power and that is around 64 Terawatt hours.

The nuclear link is clear for energy importers as I note plans in the news for India to build another 12.

Comment

There are many ways of looking at this so let’s start with central banks. As I have hinted at with India they used to respond to a higher oil price with higher interest-rates to combat inflation but now mostly respond to expected lower aggregate demand and GDP with interest-rate cuts. They rarely get challenged on this U-Turn as we listen to Kylie.

I’m spinning around
Move outta my way
I know you’re feeling me
‘Cause you like it like this
I’m breaking it down
I’m not the same
I know you’re feeling me
‘Cause you like it like this

Next comes the way we have become less oil energy dependent. One way that has happened has been through higher efficiency such as LED light bulbs replacing incandescent ones. Another has been the growth of alternative sources for electricity production as right now in my home country the UK it is solar (10%) wind (15%) biomass (8%) and nukes (18%) helping out. I do not know what the wind will do but solar will of course rise although its problems are highlighted by the fact it falls back to zero at night as we continue to lack any real storage capacity. Also such moves have driven prices higher.

As to what’s next? Well I think that there is some hope on two counts. Firstly President Trump will want the oil price lower for the US economy and the 2020 election. So he may grow tired of pressurising Iran and on the other side of the coin the military/industrial complex may be able to persuade Saudi Arabia to up its output. Also we know what the headlines below usually mean.

Podcast

Will commodity price rises trigger inflation in 2018?

As we begin our journey into 2018 then there has been one clear trend so far as Bloomberg has pointed out this morning.

The Bloomberg Commodities Spot Index, tracking the price of 22 raw materials, jumped to its highest since December 2014 on Thursday. The gauge has risen for a record 14 days in a row.

If we take a look at the underlying data we see that the index has rallied from just below 340 on the 11th of December to 361 as I type this and it has been pretty much one-way traffic. So perhaps ripe for a correction in the short-term but if we look further back we see that it is up 8% on a year ago and that this stronger phase began just under 2 years ago in mid January 2016 when the index dipped below 255. This leaves us with an intriguing conclusion which is that the commodities index saw a strong rally in 2016 just as we were being told inflation was dead as mainstream analysis looked back on the previous downwards trend.

Bloomberg is upbeat on the causes of this recent phase.

The strongest manufacturing activity since the aftermath of the global financial crisis is slowly draining commodities surpluses, sending prices to a 3-year high as investors pour money into everything from oil to copper.

“Rarely has the outlook for a New Year been as encouraging as it is today,” said Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Berenberg Bank in London.

With factories around the world humming, demand for raw materials is fast increasing.

That is an upbeat way of looking at the issue although of course it omits something that in other articles they tell us is important which is the use of finite resources. We get however a clue to their emphasis from this.

Where to make Big Money in Commodities, Energy

I particularly like the way that Big Money is in capitals. Anyway well done to those who had stockpiled commodities. Also there may be a misprint about the chief economist of Berenberg Bank being in London as of course Bloomberg readers will have been told that all such jobs have gone to Frankfurt although they may be further confused by the brand new shiny Bloomberg offices in London! Moving to the Financial Times we also see that good economic news is on their minds.

Markit’s global survey of manufacturing activity rose to a near seven-year high in December, fuelling optimism that 2018 could be another year of strong growth.

Crude Oil

The rally here poses something of a problem for economics/finance themes because as regular readers will recall we were told that the advent of shale oil production would prevent price rises. One part of the analysis was true in that they have indeed produced more oil.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects U.S. crude oil production to have averaged 9.2 million bpd for all of last year. It expects U.S. crude oil production to average an all-time high of 10.0 million bpd this year, which would beat the current record set in 1970. ( OilPrice.com)

That is of course more than awkward for those who put Peak Oil theories forwards in the 1970s for a start. Moving back to the current oil price what was not forseen was that OPEC will not only announce production cuts but actually go through with the announcements leading to this.

however, oil prices rose steadily in the fourth quarter of 2017 to end the year at above $60 per barrel WTI and $66 per barrel Brent.

Brent Crude Oil nudged over US $68 per barrel earlier today or as high as it has been for two and a half years. At such a level we see that there is good news for oil producers of all sorts.Firstly there must be something of a bonanza for the shale oil producers with the cash flow style business model we have previously analysed. But also there will be all sorts of gains for the more traditional oil producers in the Middle East as well as Canada and Russia. There has been an irony in that the pipeline shutdown for the UK Forties field meant that Brent production could not benefit from higher Brent prices but that is now over.

Inflation

Last September an International Monetary Fund ( IMF) working paper looked at how oil price moves affected inflation.

 We find that a 10 percent increase in global oil inflation increases, on average, domestic inflation by about 0.4 percentage point on impact, with the effect vanishing after two years and being similar between advanced and developing economies.

There was also some support for those who think that the effect is stronger when prices rise.

We also find that the effect is asymmetric, with positive oil price shocks having a larger effect than negative ones

The results also vary from country to country as the impact on the UK is double that of the impact on the United States although this may be influenced by 1970s data when the UK Pound £ would have acted like the Great British Peso on any oil price rise.

As an aside I would like to remind everyone of the way a surge in the oil price contributed to the economic effects of the credit crunch, something which tends to get forgotten these days. On that road the credit crunch era becomes easier to understand and the establishment mantra which this IMF paper repeats becomes more questionable.

The has declined over time, mostly
due to the improvement in the conduct of monetary policy.

A darker road can be found if we look at the impact of bank commodity trading desks back then because if as I believe they drove oil prices higher there is a raft of questions to add to the other scandals we have seen such as Li(e)bor and foreign exchange rigging.

Metals

There has been a raft of news about these hitting new highs and let us start with what Dr,Copper is telling us.

Copper gained 30%  in 2017 as it continues to recover from six-year lows struck early last year……… Measured from its multi-year lows struck at the beginning of 2016, copper has gained more than 70% in value. ( Mining.com)

Palladium has been hitting all-time highs this week. If we look deeper we see that metals prices have been rising overall as the CRB metals index which was conveniently at 800 this time last year is at 912 as I type this.

Comment

There are various factors to consider here but let me open with a word not in frequent use in the credit crunch era which is reflation. We are seeing a stronger economic phase ( good although there is the underlying finite resources issue) but how much of this higher demand will feed into inflation may be the next question? There have been signs of Something Going On as Todd Terry would put it. From the Composite PMI or business survey for the Euro area.

The pace of inflation signalled for each price
measure remained strong relative to their long-run
trends, however, and among the steepest seen over
the past six-and-a-half years.

Also for the UK services sector.

Input price inflation reached its highest level since
last September, with service providers noting
upward pressures on costs from a wide range of
sources.

Moving to a different perspective some seem to be placing their betting chips in the US according to the Financial Times.

Investors pour money into funds that protect against inflation

Also there will be wealth and GDP shifts in favour of commodity producers and from those that consume them. The obvious beneficiary is much of the Middle East but others such as Australia, Canada and Russia will be smiling and that is before we get to the US shale oil producers who have been handed a lifeline. It also reminds me that the Chinese effort to get control of commodities around the world and particularly in Africa looks much more far-sighted than us western capitalist imperialists have so far managed. That is something which will particularly annoy Japan which of course is a large loser as commodity prices rise due to its lack of natural resources as its own more violent and aggressive efforts in this field badly misfired in the 1940s.