Short term cautions not withstanding, we are on the precipice of something great.

The entire structure of the global economy is shifting, slightly and slowly. But like all great change, the most striking of the movement comes all at once, at the end.

The United States is driving this assault of the balances of power, globally, as the energy revolution progresses on our shores. This country is set to become the biggest oil producer in the world – and we are now slowly removing the export restrictions that are the last remaining barrier to this end.

This isn’t just about US trade balances and deficits. Those numbers games matter, but they always matter less than you think.

This game is about power. Oil has been the source of power to our enemies for too long. Russia and the Middle East have fed well on global consumption of this product, erecting their cartels around the flow oil to global industry. It has made them powerful and a threat.

The move by the US to become the world’s largest producer of oil and gas can be viewed through a different lens than financial gain alone: this is also going to completely upend our adversaries. What wars and weapons and diplomacy and cooperation could not possibly have accomplished, given the entrenched interests we faced, this one mighty push on our part will quickly bring about.

This is a once in a lifetime opportunity. You must get invested in it, and stay invested in it. All US leadership sees the goal, and no one objects to it. The days of getting beat about by monarchies in Saudi Arabia, needing to cut backroom deals that undermine our own morals with foreign militant groups, having to sit through endless meetings while Russian oligarchs threaten our allies with gas supply shortages…these days are coming to an end.

As the US increasingly becomes energy independent, the argument to even have relations with half these villains becomes non sequitur. We can marginalize them while circling around our true allies and real friends.

I can’t see everything that is going to come from this. Naturally US power will follow. And the North and South American continents should improve, swinging towards democracy and capitalism. Outside of that, while I think US energy independence is a good thing, I wouldn’t be surprised if war also follows. Revolutions surely, but also open war between foreign, former energy exporters who find themselves being boxed into a corner. The Saudi’s days are surely numbered, in particular.

My bet is that Russia will not change much, but they will also have to cut less lucrative deals with China to make it. So at least they will be a less powerful, less interfering Russia. Good riddance there.

Suffice to say, this is unpredictability at its best. While I think I see the theme, I do not yet hear the notes. But I’ll take my chances with it anyway. The old order of things was repulsive. I won’t be crying any tears for OPEC, or for Russia.

Comments »

HCLP just blew through $60, as analysts raise targets in response to the HAL announcement.

BAS is back above $27. I guess I could have held onto all of those shares, but I have no regrets. Retaining a 15% position in BAS is more than reasonable.

SLW is pushing its way to $26.

My only position that is down noticeably today is UEC. And that remains my smallest position at 5% of assets.

Fracking investments remain the place to be. Oil names are doing well by extension (and a high price per barrel). I’m telling you, coal will be the next thing to run.

Have a wonderful afternoon.

Comments »

I added a small, 5% position to my book in BTU for $16.10, to commemorate the EPA issuing new power plant emission regulations.

My guess is the equity position is worth about $7 now. And they’re losing money every quarter. But this is investing, not guaranteeing. Market forces will either correct through higher electricity prices for consumers, rebalancing the coal market. Or, a third of the US grid goes offline and gun/ammunition manufacturers become the new Coca Cola.

I’m also looking at a few distribution terminals I think might see big volume increases as struggling coal producers – coupled with natural gas exporters looking to Europe – try and tap foreign markets for trade.

I’m moving slow here, not in any rush to push the limits. This is going to be very volatile; lots of room to play individual names sawing 25% up and down, but the overeager will lose a finger if they don’t give themselves room to back off.

The US is about to be the world’s biggest energy exporter for the next century. You can quote me on that. It’s just a matter of edging in and building position.

Your move.

Comments »

I entered into NRP some time ago, which was quickly an unmitigated disaster. The position is down 25% from my purchase price. I sold half the position, along with other partial positions, back in January when I raised cash.

Today, I added back some of that for $14.93.

I want to talk at brief about coal. The time to buy into US coal reserves is now, while euphoria over natural gas is highest and markets are most spooked about a Democrat directed EPA.

I am in no way minimalizing the importance of the shale revolution. Not by a longshot – if you look at my own holdings, BAS and HCLP represent a firm belief in the continued importance of those assets to the US energy equation.

What I am doing is highlighting the continued importance coal will have in US power generation and abroad.

Coal presently makes up just over 1/3 of US domestic generation. This is down from 1/2 earlier this decade, most prominently replaced by the surge in application with natural gas. Yet, markets price in equilibrium of choices, when operating correctly.

We have to presume that markets will find a price that fairly limits benefits between choosing natural gas versus coal versus nuclear versus…for equivalent production of energy. This would suggest that natural gas prices are set to rise (further enhancing the payoff for the producers). I would also expect that, as excess capacity gets utilized, the adaptation of coal plants to gas will subside.

This process may take a little longer to finish, and perhaps gas will even match coal in terms of energy mix before it is done. What I would not count on is coal rapidly or even ever completely being removed from global energy production.

Which brings us to the fears of EPA punitive measures against coal. So far, these are aimed at coal fired power plants. While this would, at least temporarily, hinder US energy production from coal here at home, what is to stop US coal producers from simply shipping overseas? And why is metallurgical coal acting so volatile when it is not a component of US power generation?

The signs, to my eyes, spell clear a story of market overreaction to pop culture and fantasy. Power generation shifts or slides, waxes or wanes. It does not turn on or off. Coal has been systematically shunned regardless of its exact nature (energy versus metallurgical) and the driving catalyst seems to be mostly political.

But politics change and politics in this country are about to.

I will give you a 6 month synopsis of what is about to happen. In November, the DNC is going to get creamed, delivering the Senate to the RNC. You can suspend your political predilections, as this is merely obvious to anyone not sucking their own exhaust. And the GOP has no problem with coal power generation. In fact, the Republicans think the argument against coal power generation is, quote, “stupid”.

This will change the short term plot dynamics that drive most superficial market players. Around middle of 2015 or early 2016, coal will be “the most obvious buy ever”, whereas today it is “fools nonsense.” Of course, when it is “the most obvious buy ever”, it will be at some considerable percentage above where you can take a position today.

This will accelerate especially if it should appear going into the next presidential election that a Republican is about to take the White House (that is still too far out for me to see, but it is certainly not out of the question). In such an event, the current shunning of coal will look especially stupid and myopic.

Regardless of the next presidential cycle though, the simple act of the GOP taking both chambers of Congress should noticeably shift the messaging surrounding out of favor coal plays. Executive overreach through agency bodies, no longer shielded by the Senate, will begin getting visibly and openly reprimanded; or even punished.

This shift, along with coals critical importance to the US economy and abroad, should render this a generous buying opportunity in hindsight.

Comments »

I may love the prospect of a uranium miner rebound, but I’ve also loved the idea for three years. There’s no dancing around how frustrating this time has been. It’s an obvious, solid move, but…man it takes a time to develop.

Trading around a pickup in demand in an industry where you can go eight months without any orders is maddening. Maybe those publicly traded, paper products in “ETF Land” are saying uranium prices are still on the rebound. But brokerage reports are saying we’re back to hitting new lows in the spot price.

None of which is going to shake me. I’m set in my ways. Just… give me my triumph now.

It’s not that bad, what I want, is it?

I just want for us to hurry up and get to where we’re going, so that I can make a ridiculous killing and rub it like sand into the eyes of anyone who happens to be passing by. I’m not a difficult man to work with. Is this so awful?

Give me my victory laurels and my silver chalice, and I will be content. I’m a simple man, at heart.

Comments »

The big thing holding back the uranium miners right now isn’t concern for the long term viability of the industry – to the contrary, it is very clear to everyone that nuclear power generation is about to increase. Even concern in the US over aging reactors being taken offline is being tempered as four new state of the art models have been approved for construction.

Actually, the major impediment to higher prices is just the spot price for U3O8. The broker I follow has reported the spot price has just corrected back to new lows (based on how many virtually non-existent sales, I cannot say). URA meanwhile shows prices have corrected from the recent rally, although still off the bottom.

In that spirit, here is what I’m reading.

Uranium Participation Corp (TSX:U) is the only physically backed uranium fund. The company’s primary objective is to achieve appreciation in the value of its uranium holdings through increases in the uranium spot price. In December, Raymond James analyst David Sadowski made a case for investing in UPC, a fund managed by the management team responsible for Denison Mines (TSX:DML), explaining that the fund offers investors with “great exposure to a uranium price rebound without the typical exploration, development or mining risks associated with some of the other equities.”

After having completed a $57.6 million bought deal financing on February 6, UPC has made its first purchase of uranium in four years. The company announced on Friday that it would use a portion of bought deal financing to purchase 850,000 pounds of U3O8 at an average cost of US$34.74. UPC notes that 250,000 pounds have already been delivered, the remainder will be delivered by the end of June.

In a note to investors, David Sadowski views UPC’s latest announcement as a point in the company’s favor, supported by the overall sentiment that uranium prices are set to strengthen over the next 12 to 14 months on supply shortfalls and JApanese reactor restarts. Given these variables, and the companies current available cash, Sadowski expects to see another purchase of 800, 000 – 900,000 pounds of uranium sometime in the coming weeks.

I’m still confident we see nuclear take off this year. In the past I’ve been a little more shy about such a direct claim, arguing “sometime in the next X years,” instead. But I do believe 2014 will be the year.

I also think the volatile pricing we’re seeing is the market putting in a bottom / shaking out the weak hands as the big players start to take a more direct financial interest.

Recall from our prior discussions that the refueling needs of real reactors is almost logistics free. A nuclear reactor can run at full power for almost three years without needing a delivery of fuel from the outside, on nothing but what’s in the rods plus the typical amount of fuel in storage for a common model.

From 2011, three years is almost up. By which, I would surmise, nuclear power operations in aggregate will either begin to see electricity output decline, or else need to make a purchase.

Just my two cents on the matter.

Comments »