Contrary to popular mythology, we Californians do not live merely on love, sunshine and granola.

I mean, sure, we've all got our yoga mats, our quartz crystals and our "life coaches" (who doesn't?), but life is just so much more than "namastes" and positive energy. Life is also about building enough windmills (somewhere else) and installing enough solar panels (somewhere else) to keep our yoga studios air-conditioned.

And, yeah, I guess we need SOME crude oil, cause our Priuses cannot ALWAYS run on electricity. So I guess its fine to use crude oil if we have to, as long as we can obtain the oil in an ecologically friendly way...like getting it from somewhere else. (OMG, remember the Santa Barbara oil spill in 1969? That was a SERIOUS bummer!)

So, yes, we Californians certainly understand that we cannot break our dependence on crude oil overnight. At least not until some "next generation" process comes along that can convert text messages into jet fuel. And even if we Californians use less crude oil, someone else is bound to use more of it...like all those reckless industrialists in the Developing World. Don't they know how bad crude oil is for the environment?

But I guess there's just no reasoning with these people. So I guess we'll just have to keep finding and pumping crude oil for a long time to come.

Hmmm... I'm not sure how easy that's going to be. When I was out recycling newspapers the other day, I saw an old headline that said crude oil is becoming much harder to find...and that oil production is falling off rapidly at many of the world's largest fields.

So I did a little research and - would you believe - it's true. Crude oil is becoming much harder to find and much more expensive to produce.

Eric Fry
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• The Price of Oil Explained by ‘Astrology’
• Supply of Conventional Crude Oil is Very Close to its Peak
• Increased Oil Production Won’t Solve the Energy Crisis
• We Are Facing a Global Oil Crunch
• Consumer Confidence is at its Lowest Point Since 1980

Our story begins with "Peak Oil" - the belief that conventional production of crude has already peaked, and has already slipped into an irreversible decline. As "Peak Oil" moves from mere theory to indisputable fact, the global economy will face wrenching changes. But the vigilant investor will gain an opportunity to profit along the way.

As I discussed in yesterday's edition of The Daily Reckoning, oil production seems all-but-certain to decline, despite the huge new discoveries off the coasts of Brazil, Africa and elsewhere. In fact, production is already declining rapidly from some of the world's largest fields. Mexico's "Catarell" Field, like a kind of Peak Oil poster child, was producing more than 2 million barrels a day as recently as 2005. But production from this field is plummeting irreversibly toward 500,000 barrels a day, as the chart below illustrates.

The recent discoveries of deep offshore oil will certainly help slow the decline of conventional crude oil production, but theses discoveries will not come on line for many, many years.

But what about alternative energy sources? Won't they make up for the shortfall of crude oil? No chance. Alternative energies might offset a tiny sliver of falling crude oil production. But solar panels can't lift a fully loaded Boeing 777 off a runway...nor even lift an empty Piper Cub.

So what about the many sources of "unconventional" oil and gas? Won't these compensate for declining production from conventional sources? The short answer is no.

Geologist Art Berman, for example, offers a decidedly negative view of the latest "big thing" - obtaining large volumes of natural gas from "tight shales." In a comprehensive review of production and flow rates from several thousand wells drilled in the past decade in the Barnett Shale of Texas, Mr. Berman presents a gloomy forecast.

Looking at a large sampling of Barnett wells, the overall data reveal that initial gas flows decline rapidly. With some wells, the drop-off is as much as 70% in the first year, with further declines of 20% in the second year.

This hardly dovetails with the happy talk about how "shale gas" will supply US energy requirements for the next several decades, if not a couple of centuries. It appears that most Barnett wells are short-term money losers, with a few prolific wells carrying the bulk of capital expenditure.

According to Mr. Berman, the picture is not much better in other shale plays, such as the Fayetteville and Haynesville shales. And similar gloomy data are just now starting to come in on the embryonic gas play in the giant Marcellus formation of Pennsylvania.

But this bad news does need to be ALL bad. As the world's mature and aging oil fields slip into an irreversible decline, production from the world's new offshore discoveries will become increasingly important.

Therefore, forward-looking investors can begin TODAY to make selective investments in those sectors of the oil industry that will flourish during the coming oil shock. I am particularly fond of the "deepwater" sector...and have been urging my subscribers for several months to focus on the companies that facilitate deepwater oil production.

Marcio Mello, the former "explorationist" from Petrobras (PBR: NYSE) and now independent petroleum consultant, electrified the Denver meeting of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas (ASPO) with his analysis of several high-profile deepwater discoveries.

In a riveting talk that lasted well over an hour, Marcio detailed the immense petroleum potential of offshore Brazil, as well as the Amazon Basin. If Marcio's estimates are correct, Brazil may be the location of nearly 200 billion barrels of additional petroleum resources. That's well within the range of current resource estimates for Saudi Arabia.

For good measure, Marcio described the petroleum potential of offshore West Africa - another 130 billion barrels - as well as the Congo region, with 50 billion barrels or more.

Finally, Marcio described the "unknown potential of the US back yard, the Gulf of Mexico (GOM)." Marcio offered remarkable insight into the deep regions of the GOM, 100 miles and more offshore Texas and Louisiana. He showed early work he performed on a number of GOM areas, including the site of BP's (BP: NYSE) recent billion-plus barrel find at the Tiber site.

If his analyses of the South American, African and GOM petroleum systems are correct, the world has access to much more conventional oil than people previously believed. But accessing and producing this oil will require a trillion-dollar level of offshore, deepwater investment. It's a 30- to 50-year project.

"Deepwater" will be a BIG business.

Some of the companies that are well-positioned for the deepwater era of crude oil production include Petrobras, Repsol (REP: NYSE), BP (BP: NYSE) and StatoilHydro (STO: NYSE). I am also a fan of subsea equipment builders like Cameron Intl. (CAM: NYSE) and FMC Technologies (FTI: NYSE), plus service companies like Halliburton (HAL: NYSE) and Baker Hughes (BHI: NYSE).

These are a few of my favorite long-term plays for the long-term era of deep-water development.

Regards,

Byron King,
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Peak Oil – The Risks
• Supply of Conventional Crude Oil is Very Close to its Peak
• Peak Oil: Supply Data Doesn’t Lie
• Where Will Future Oil Production Come From and How Can Investors Profit Today? Part 2
• Pemex and Mexican Peak Oil Equal Expensive Oil

That's the world's current production of crude oil...and that may very well be close to the world's PEAK production of crude oil. Although the recession caused a temporary decrease in consumption, demand is already bouncing back toward pre-crisis levels. Too bad production isn't.

"Can't we get more than 85 million barrels?" some folks are bound to wonder. Let's look into that...

A couple weeks ago, I attended the 2009 international conference of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO), out in Denver. Here's the long and short of it. We're in trouble. With a capital "T," and that rhymes with "P," and that stands for Peak Oil. By every measure, the world's output of crude oil peaked between 2005 and 2007.

Yes, the worldwide total output of what we generically call "oil" has risen - slightly - in recent years. But that's because there are increasing volumes of natural gas liquids (NGLs) in the mix, plus unconventional oil like what the global marketplace obtains from Canada's oil sands. But the production of oil - actual oil - has peaked already. The future of conventional petroleum output is downhill, even with the future output from the deep-water offshore discoveries.

"There's no such thing as West Texas Intermediate [WTI] oil anymore," Peak Oil apologist, Matt Simmons, moaned to the ASPO conference attendees. Instead, the pipeline crossroads like Cushing, Okla., have become little more than "crude oil pharmacies."

In other words, as the quality of the crude from the traditional U.S. oil patch continues to degrade, oilmen must mix and match their product with "sweeter" forms of crude if they hope to sell it as the premium- priced WTI. Thus, operators at Cushing take whatever oil they can obtain from one place, plus whatever oil they can obtain from another place. They mix and match, and blend it all with synthetic crude from Canada. Maybe they add some imported oil juice and then send it down the line as WTI.

Along these same lines, Venezuelan economist Carlos Rossi stated to ASPO his analysis of oil trends in the U.S. "You are worried about your foreign oil imports now," he said. "You in the U.S. import about 65% of your oil today. You don't like it. But if you follow the clear trends, by 2025, you'll be importing about 92% of your oil. You'll like that even less." No doubt.

The market meltdown and world recession of the past year has bought some time. But the planet is still staring at an energy problem that's coming down the tracks like a runaway freight train.

Sure, there's a lot more oil "out there"...as in WAY out there - 150 miles offshore, beneath 8,000 feet of water and 20,000 feet of rock and salt. Yes, that offshore resource is out there, but it's super hard to extract.

And so what? Aren't the world's oil companies busy developing these massive offshore deposits? Yes, but this development will take decades. It'll take time and capital and expensive cutting-edge technologies, some of which are barely commercially viable.

Future energy supplies have never been more uncertain, according to Simmons. It's difficult to say with specificity how bad things are, he says, because the data are so poor on a worldwide basis.

"Look at what happened with the bad information we had, or didn't have, with the financial institutions over the past couple of years," Simmons said at the recent ASPO Conference. "With our energy data, it's worse. We're in for some shocks that will change our lives in ways that'll rival Pearl Harbor."

Things could go wrong with energy supplies in any of a dozen places, according to Mr. Simmons. In Venezuela, the output of the state oil company PdVSA is declining at alarming rates due to political interference and underinvestment. In Nigeria, the low-grade civil war could quickly morph into a large-scale civil war. In Iraq, according to Mr. Simmons, "They're in the dark about how to rebuild their oil industry."

Closer to home, Simmons expects net oil exports from Mexico to vanish within 24 months or less. This event will play havoc with U.S. refiners on the Gulf Coast. Mexico has simply delayed for too long its effort to explore, drill and rebuild its fast-depleting oil resources. Mexico is going to have to scramble to salvage something from its looming energy disaster.

But even without a supply shock, Simmons believes that the mere inevitability of declining production will cause oil to hit $200 a barrel by the end of next year. Longer term, Mr. Simmons expects to see oil at $500-700 per barrel. "People need to understand how expensive it is to obtain oil," said Simmons.

Much of the world's energy infrastructure is old and rusting and will require several trillions of dollars to replace - if it can be replaced. Furthermore, new technology is coming on line slower than most people anticipate. The deeper, more challenging environments are sucking down technology and money, and yielding less than expected in many cases. According to one study, only eight out of 100 major energy projects came in on time, were within budget and yielded the expected volumes of oil and natural gas.

The stark fact is that oil is going to get a lot more expensive and the bull market in oil will be firmly in place for a long time. Smart investors would take advantage of any corrections or dips to get themselves buckled-in for the ride.

Regards,

Byron King,
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Peak Oil – The Rewards
• Crude Oil Becoming Much Harder to Find
• Peak Oil: Supply Data Doesn’t Lie
• Pemex and Mexican Peak Oil Equal Expensive Oil
• Supply of Conventional Crude Oil is Very Close to its Peak

Look. Skeptics can say what they want; it does not change the fact that our world is struggling to maintain daily flow-rates. Whether you agree with us or not, the energy reality is that the supply of conventional crude oil is very close to its peak and no other fuel source can easily fill the supply gap.

Yes, various governments are now promoting alternative sources of energy and over the following years, we expect this drive to intensify. But those sources will provide too little, too late. So there remains, today, an unbelievable degree of denial when it comes to 'Peak Oil.' Most people simply dismiss it as a conspiracy. Others gleefully point to alternative sources of energy, whereas some believe that the vast improvements in oil drilling technology will save the day. Do not be seduced by these delusional hopes.

Remember, crude oil is the lifeblood of the global economy and roughly 70% of it is used to power transportation. Moreover, a vast amount of crude oil is also used up by agriculture (production of fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation systems). In fact, modern-day agriculture can be best described as a process of converting hydrocarbons into calories. Without cheap energy, the world would certainly have trouble producing half of the current food supply and the result could be far worse.

Thus, crude oil is a key ingredient in two of the most critical processes which make modern life possible - transportation and agriculture. And shortages of this vital natural resource will result in extreme pain. In the initial stages, the price of crude oil will rise remorselessly and eventually, we will face rationing.

Now that we have established the importance of crude oil, we will explain why new drilling technology and alternative sources of energy will not make this problem go away.

First, as far as drilling technology is concerned, it is worth noting that America is home to the best oilfield technology on this planet. However, its oil production peaked in the early 1970s and has been in a relentless decline. Furthermore, apart from America, other technologically advanced nations in the world have also failed in maintaining their daily flow-rates. For instance, after exporting crude oil for over two decades, Britain is now a net importer and its production is in a state of permanent decline. Hard data confirms that two of the most advanced countries in the world now live in a post 'Peak Oil' era, so what are the odds that other less fortunate nations will succeed in averting 'Peak Oil'?

Secondly, as far as alternative sources of energy are concerned, they represent a drop in the energy ocean and will not be able to offset the depletion in crude oil. Despite all the euphoria surrounding renewable energy, the 'sources' like ethanol and solar panels are net energy losers. In other words, it takes more energy to produce ethanol and solar panels than the energy you obtain from them. For sure, hybrid and electric cars will help us to some degree but you must keep in mind the fact that electricity is not a source of energy; it is a carrier of energy. Even if electric cars become popular, how will we generate sufficient electricity?

Elsewhere in the alternative energy patch, a lot of hopes currently rest on unconventional sources of oil (especially tar sands and shale oil). Once again, this optimism is misplaced, as the increased supply from the unconventional sources will not even make a dent in the overall energy picture. The nearby chart confirms that our world currently produces roughly 85 million barrels per day of total liquids and out of this gigantic sum, only 13 million barrels per day of oil is derived from unconventional sources. So, when the production of conventional crude oil finally declines due to 'Peak Oil', it is extremely improbable that unconventional supply will be able to rise to the challenge.

As far as Canada's tar sands are concerned, Alberta currently produces roughly 1.4 million barrels of oil per day and under the best case scenario, this figure is expected to rise to just 3.5 million barrels per day by 2020. To complicate matters even further, the tar sands require huge amounts of water and natural gas. In addition to this, the mining procedure is extremely polluting. For example, the process of extracting 'oil' from bitumen releases at least three times the amount of carbon dioxide emissions as regular oil production. Accordingly, we have no doubt in our minds that Canada's tar is not the Holy Grail.

Finally, the new oil shale discoveries in America are not going to help us either because the 'oil' trapped in the shale is in fact kerogen - a precursor to oil. So far, all major oil companies have struggled to convert the kerogen into usable oil and it will be interesting to see whether any of them succeeds in the future. In any case, this conversion process is extremely expensive and we can assure you that shale will not be producing any oil at today's prices. Recent studies reveal that the price of oil will have to rise to several hundred dollars per barrel to make this process economically feasible.

Well, now that we have covered the supply side, let us briefly discuss the demand side of the equation. According to the IEA, global oil usage in 2009 will amount to 84.4 million barrels per day and it will rise to 85.7 million barrels per day in 2010. This means that oil demand will rise by 1.5% over the next twelve months which is in line with the growth rate over the past two decades. If this growth rate continues over the next 4-5 years, there is no way our world will be able to ramp up production.

Unfortunately, positive thoughts and wishful thinking will not change the equation. Precious time has been wasted and we have no margin of safety. We must prepare ourselves for sky-high commodity prices and periods of acute shortages, which will make wartime conditions seem rosy. In fact, we believe we are already a decade into this painful transition but let us warn you that we have seen nothing yet.

If our assessment is correct, it seems prudent to make a sizeable allocation to the energy sector. However, given the realities of 'Peak Oil', we do not recommend exposure to the oil majors, as their reserves and production are in decline. On the contrary, we urge you to invest your capital in quality upstream oil/gas companies and businesses involved in the energy services sector.

Regards,

Puru Saxena,
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Peak Oil – The Rewards
• Peak Oil: Supply Data Doesn’t Lie
• Increased Oil Production Won’t Solve the Energy Crisis
• International Energy Agency Rejects Possibility Crude Oil Output is in Terminal Decline
• Peak Oil – The Risks

The team at Casey's Energy Opportunities believe that planned government buying or selling of crude oil for SPRs actually have very little impact in the overall market. However, an overall drawdown of worldwide inventory could put downward pressure on the price of oil. The various countries also have their particular reasons and influences in decisions to tap their reserves.

So which countries are executing preparedness plans to fill their strategic reserves with $70 oil now (as opposed to $140+)? Below are the 10 countries that consume the most oil in the world, as of 2008, the latest figures available from the BP Statistical Review of World Energy:

Russia, Canada, and Saudi Arabia can leave the list, as they are net exporters of oil and thus do not actually require a strategic reserve, at least in the short term. We'll also bump Brazil, because its balance of imports is dwindling every year, and it should become a exporter before it requires a reserve. That leaves six countries to examine:

The United States

Not surprisingly, America has the largest strategic reserve in the world in an absolute sense. Its 727 million barrels are stored in four hollowed-out salt domes (and one pending) along the coastline of the Gulf of Mexico. These add up to some 62 days' worth of imports, according to government sources. The United States government currently has plans to push this to 1 billion barrels, or about 85 days' worth of imports, which would make the reserves equivalent to those of Japan and Korea.

The SPR build-up will be accomplished by expanding two of the current facilities, for an additional 113 million barrels, and (probably) building a new one in Richton, Missouri, for 160 million barrels. The Richton project has met local opposition, because it would require pumping 50 million gallons of freshwater per day from the Pascagoula River to dissolve enough salt to open up another subterranean cavern. The total cost of the program is estimated at US$3.7 billion, not including the cost to fill the reserves. Oil purchases are likely to be slow, at around 100,000 bpd (barrels per day) before 2014 and 150,000 bpd thereafter.

In a real emergency, the combined American strategic and commercial reserves (the latter held by private corporations, especially refiners) may seem unnervingly thin from the perspective of energy security. Add to that the fact that the government can release them at a rate of only 4.4 million barrels per day, or about half its imports.

Still, the 108 or so days' reserve it has between government and commercial sources are considered adequate by international standards. The United States has used this reserve twice in the past 20 years (Desert Storm and Hurricane Katrina) to combat severe demand or supply disruptions. It also has the luxury of importing more oil from Canada in an emergency.

Scenarios that could force a sustained drawdown of reserves:

• Sustained hyperinflation in the United States due to actions by the Federal Reserve that causes oil-producing countries to look for better markets to sell oil.
• A prolonged general embargo by OPEC on the United States, forcing America to look to traditional partners such as Canada and Mexico, though they might not have sufficient oil.
• Another war, potentially in North Korea or Iran, requiring a large amount of oil input from America that it simply does not have.
• A particularly active hurricane season that knocks out a large amount of production capacity in the Gulf of Mexico, and the United States releases from the SPR to help.

China

China's strategic reserves began being built in 2004, when leaders in China began to realize that the country had no adequate government- controlled reserves to combat any disruptions in the supply of oil. China is a large importer and is dependent on the same sources of foreign oil as the United States. China is even more anxious to build such a reserve, as two of its neighbors, Korea and Japan, both have large strategic reserves.

China currently has four government reserves with a total reserve potential of 272 million barrels, which translates to about 30 days' consumption. Two of the four have been confirmed full, and there are rumors that all four are and that China has taken advantage of the recent precipitous drop in the price of oil to buy up. According to Chinese government sources, however, the reserves are likely not to be completely full until 2010, and 2009 buying of oil will be at around 42 million barrels.

The government has also announced plans to increase the country's reserve from 30 to 100 days of consumption. The next stage of the development will call for an additional 170 million barrels in eight storage facilities. The locations of the facilities are as yet secret.

In an emergency, China would likely turn to Russia to buy oil, though only the naive would be surprised if Russia added a premium for the privilege.

Scenarios that could force a sustained drawdown of reserves in China:

• Worldwide embargo on China due to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
• High oil prices force Chinese industries out of business, pressuring the government to keep oil prices low domestically by selling some of the reserves to domestic companies.
• North Korea asks for oil from China to support military action on the Korean Peninsula, and China ships it to them on the black market.
• Russia slows or stops its exports as part of the Russian "dominance via energy" strategy, leaving Chinese pipelines trickling and Chinese industries disrupted.

Japan/South Korea

We have placed Japan and South Korea's reserves together, as the two countries have a treaty that allows them to share their strategic reserves.

Resource-poor Japan has one of the world's largest strategic oil reserves, enough for 82 days of imports. State-controlled reserves are run by the state-owned Japan Oil, Gas, and Metals National Corporation. The reserves consist of 320 million barrels in 10 different locations, which makes them second only to the United States in absolute volume. Japan's island geography means that having an emergency supply of crude oil is crucial, and the Japanese government obviously has not ignored this aspect.

South Korea is in one of the global "hotspots" in the world, right beside North Korea. As the country is under an almost constant threat of war, the government has stocked up some 76 million barrels, with capacity for an additional 40 million barrels.

Scenarios that could force a drawdown of reserves:

• Just one at this time, from two possible sources: political instability in the region caused by either the Taiwan or the Korea conundrums disrupts tanker transport, perhaps even forces them to port.

India

India has a small reserve it began to build in 2004. This stockpile is sufficient for perhaps only two weeks of consumption. The country eventually wants to raise this level to 45 days, though the first phase has not even been completed yet. The projects are estimated to come online in 2012, which means it has taken eight years from planning to completion. These figures imply that India will not even have a somewhat sufficient strategic reserve until 2016, given that the expansion project was approved in 2008.

Germany

Germany has the largest reserve in Europe and is among the top in the world as well. Its government has satisfied a federal law that regulates storage be at least 90 days' worth of net imports. More than half of the storage is in Southern Germany, where large salt caverns exist. Germany is well prepared in its strategic oil reserves, and there are no glaring factors that would force a drawdown of reserves, barring a global catastrophe. Furthermore, the reserves of Germany, France, and Italy are pooled and can be used by any of the three countries in an emergency.

So How Much Do the Reserves Matter?

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates, some 2 billion barrels are held in government-owned strategic reserves around the world. Though this seems like plenty of oil, does it really impact the spot price of oil? Collectively, the answer is yes, as this volume corresponds to 23 days' worth of global consumption. If drawn down together over a short period of time, the effect on spot price could be substantial.

For illustration's sake, suppose that countries collectively draw down their entire reserves over the period of a year. This rate would make up for 10% of the daily worldwide trade of crude oil, which could certainly impact price (imagine ConocoPhillips and ExxonMobil both going under at the same time).

Individually, however, even China and the United States have a limited impact on the spot price of oil over a single year. If the United States' inventory were drawn over an entire year, it would only make for a 4% increase in supply. Under normal buying patterns of each country's strategic reserves, the impact is even smaller. Since China's 42-million-barrel purchase is over one year, their purchase would not even make a dent in the daily trade of oil.

Thus, a concerted effort by the worldwide reserves can definitely keep prices down in the short term (within a year, two at best), but cannot make for a paradigm shift in the supply/demand model of oil or the Peak Oil argument. And from the buying side, if governments plan the filling of their strategic reserves, the impact on the spot price of oil is likely to be minimal.

Perception is a tricky horse to ride, however, as we all know. Given a worldwide panic for oil à la the 1973 oil embargo, oil prices could spike in the short term, because government reserves would likely raise purchases 10% or so in a real emergency. This effect would be short lived for the foreseeable future, though, as worldwide reserves are already reaching their limits.

In short, if everything goes according to "plan" by the governments, even filling a large reserve such as the Chinese SPR would have little impact on the price of oil. For SPRs to truly impact the spot price of oil, it would have to be a global situation, with war and embargo the two most likely scenarios. Even then, the impact would be mellowed by limitations on how quickly governments can either release or purchase the oil.

Regards,

Marin Katusa
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• How to Buy Crude Oil for US$2 a Barrel
• OPEC Agrees Not to Cut Oil Production Until it Meets in May
• The War for Oil Reserves
• Oil Prices Has The Mogambo Guru Sticking His Thumb in His Eye
• Pemex and Mexican Peak Oil Equal Expensive Oil

According to the US Department of Energy, liquid fuel demand in the developed nations peaked in August 2005 at 41.89 million barrels per day. Since then, it has plunged by 3.6 million barrels per day to 38.27 million barrels per day. However, you may want to note that despite these tough economic conditions, consumption has been extremely resilient in the emerging world. For instance, demand in the developing countries peaked in October 2008 at 46.33 million barrels per day and it is down by only 0.36 million barrels per day! I am amazed that the worst global recession in decades has barely managed to shrink energy demand in the developing world. Whilst this is wonderful news for the energy investor, it is a terrible sign for society.

At present, our world is using up roughly 84 million barrels of liquid fuels per day and for the moment at least, there is sufficient supply to meet demand (Figure 1). However, when economic activity picks up, it won't take much for demand to zip right past supply. Remember, it is much easier to increase usage, but it takes a long time to ramp up production. So, unless this is a permanent global recession (which I doubt), it is inevitable that the price of oil will go up significantly over the medium to long-term.

On the supply side of the equation, let me be clear. If I was asked to pick the biggest threat to a sustainable economic recovery, Peak Oil would top that list. Remember, Peak Oil doesn't mean that we are running out of oil reserves, crude will be around for decades. However, 'Peak Oil' does imply that we are dangerously close to peak global oil production. 'Peak Oil' also means that rather than experiencing a burst in oil supplies as many expect, from here onwards, we will witness sharp declines in global flow rates. In a nutshell, the era of cheap energy is over and the price of crude oil will rocket higher over the
coming decade.

Now, many skeptics will argue that if Peak Oil was real, the price of oil wouldn't have dropped to roughly US$30 per barrel in last autumn's stunning crash. Valid point; but let us not forget that the spectacular plunge occurred at a time when global economic activity virtually came to a standstill. Let us also keep in mind that last autumn's crash in asset prices was caused by a total freeze in credit and the associated asset liquidation. Whilst I agree that the final action in crude oil's parabolic blow-off last July smacked of speculation, I can assure you that speculation alone couldn't have created a multi-year boom whereby the price of crude oil went up by almost 1500%! As you can see from Figure 1 above, supply clearly fell short of demand between 2005 and 2008, and this is why we had a magnificent bull-market in crude oil.

Make no mistake, global demand for liquid fuels will rise again - and if my homework is correct, supply won't be able to keep up. If you ignore the noise and review hard data, you will observe that the vast majority of the world's most prolific oil provinces are now past peak production and in a state of permanent depletion. According to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy, out of the 54 oil producing nations and regions in the world, only 14 are still increasing production. Alarmingly, 30 oil producing nations and regions are definitely past their peak output and the remaining 10 appear to have modestly declining production rates. Put another way, when weighted by production, Peak Oil is already a grim reality in 61% of the oil producing world!

Still not convinced about Peak Oil? Then review Figure 2, which charts the expected combined flow rates for crude oil, lease condensates and Canadian Oil Sands. As you can see from the grey shaded area, production is about to decline by roughly 5 million barrels per day by 2012.

Ironically, Figure 2 also plots the optimistic (almost laughable) forecast made by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in its "World Energy Outlook 2008". Interestingly, in last year's "World Energy Outlook", the IEA stated that in order to fulfill its optimistic projections, the world had to install 64 million barrels per day of new supply by 2030 or the equivalent of six times the Saudi Arabian output! Furthermore, the IEA declared that the energy industry had to invest hundreds of billions of dollars every year to achieve this favorable outcome.

Now, I can understand that the IEA is a government-funded agency so it has to paint a rosy picture, but it is ominous that the energy watchdog failed to mention where this surplus oil would come from!

Well, I guess you get the idea. Global crude oil production has probably peaked, new discoveries have dried up and there is a shortage of capital for investment purposes. Apart from these factors, if you believe the energy optimists, all is well in the energy industry and the price of oil is about to drop to zero!

After years of extensive research, I have no doubt in my mind that unless global demand stays weak forever, we will see supply shortages in the not too distant future. And before that occurs, the price of crude oil will stage an explosive rally. Accordingly, I suggest that all my readers allocate a large proportion of their investment portfolio to upstream energy companies and to businesses in the energy services sector.

Finally, in the energy complex, the price of natural gas is still scraping along its recent crash low and this is a fantastic long-term investment opportunity. As we approach winter in the Northern Hemisphere and heating demand picks up, we are likely to see a big rally in the price of natural gas. So, investors may want to allocate capital to this unbelievably inexpensive commodity.

Regards,

Puru Saxena
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Supply of Conventional Crude Oil is Very Close to its Peak
• Pemex and Mexican Peak Oil Equal Expensive Oil
• Peak Oil – The Rewards
• Peak Oil – The Risks
• International Energy Agency Rejects Possibility Crude Oil Output is in Terminal Decline

Nobody liked crude oil at $35 a barrel, right? And why it is easy to love gold at $950?

These are important questions if you want to get ahead of the herd.

As a young trader I was taught about the "Wall Street Journal Effect" where seasoned traders took profits when an article appeared in the paper. Things have changed with the Internet, which gives access to information like never before, but the premise is the same. Get in early and get out as others start to catch on.

The risks are often lower before a major move. And a breakout can be a confirmation that you are on the right side. By the time most investors are comfortable enough to put in their precious funds, big money has already been made by some. It's human nature, the fear of missing out may outweigh common sense when choosing opportunities.

Nobody wanted stocks when the Dow was struggling at 6500 but those same people are now testing the waters 2000 points higher.

So what am I looking at now?

Well, as a commodity guy and the editor of Resource Trader Alert I'm always looking for the best moves in hard assets.

A neglected sector that has gotten my attention is natural gas. The last few months have shown resurgence in crude with the global economy stabilizing and demand picking up. Overall crude itself has more than doubled from the lows with nat. gas lagging far behind.

For me the risk on nat gas is on the upside...in other words, I don't want to risk missing a big upturn. Prices have already fallen from $12 down to under $4 - which is a $40,000 move per futures contract. For my taste the upside potential far outweighs the chance of the downtrend continuing much lower. Gas cannot go to zero, it will always have some value, and many fundamentals can change the present landscape of low, low prices.

Thankfully very few "Sheeple" are grazing on the green green grass from natural gas demand. Significant supplies are used to produce the fertilizer necessary to feed the world. The Potash to increase crop yields has been a big mover the past few years with low grain carryover forcing farmers to get every kernel or pod out of the ground possible. Nat gas also provides much of the electricity to cool our cities in the hot dog days of summer.

The hurricane season is always a wild card that can add risk premium to prices. Any weather disruption can spark an explosion in prices. Katrina and Rita sent prices to all time highs just a few short years ago. You don't go shopping for an umbrella after the rain starts.

Think of your reaction to possible oil plays back in February when no bottom was in sight. Being ahead of the energy curve is the place I want to be. When things don't develop as planned the losses at lower levels are manageable and probability is on our side that eventually prices will move up.

Byron King, over at Outstanding Investments gives you a superb list of natural resource stocks - and over the long haul they will outperform the general markets. But if you want to grab some quick trading profit, then you'll have to plan accordingly. It all comes down to trading discipline, and knowing when to take advantage of a certain sector.

It all comes back to commodities,

Alan Knuckman
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Looking at WPL and Oil Side by Side
• S&P/ASX 200 Clears Resistance Line
• Crude Oil and the Dow Jones Index…a Close-Up
• Nervous Investors ‘Short’ the Market By Buying Commodities
• Posco’s Production Cuts May Be Bad for Australian Iron Ore

By the way, last year at the Agora Wealth Symposium in Vancouver, one of our colleagues took the stage to point out that your editor was complete moron. In this particular case, it was for being bullish on gold.

He said that gold hadn't done much adjusted for inflation since 1980. What's more, he said, its worth less, adjusted for inflation that it was twenty years ago. How, he speculated, could anyone take the advice to buy gold seriously when it had performed so abysmally?

Well here are the facts. The gold price bottomed in October of 2000 at $263.80. At that time, the S&P 500 traded at 1,379. Since then, the S&P 500 has fallen by 31% (closing yesterday at 942.43) while the gold price is up 262% to $956.

We've asked Kris Sayce to bring this small fact to the attention of our colleague when he attends this year's Vancouver show next month. The theme of this year's show is "Ten Years of Reckoning," celebrating the tenth anniversary of the Daily Reckoning. Kris will be spearheading the Australian delegation. More details on that later this month.

In any event, it seems pretty obvious, that for the last ten years anyway, selling stocks and buying gold would have been a good trade/strategy. Stocks ended an 18-year bull market in 2000 and gold ended a 20-year bear market. One asset class was at a cyclical low. The other was at a cyclical high. In fact, you might even say that one was at a generational low and the other was at a generational high.

Gold is no longer as low as it once was. But it's still not as high as we expect it to go before it starts to look foolish. Meanwhile, today's government bond market looks an awful lot like the stock market circa 2000. You're seeing a generational high in bonds. It's another version of the "high-low" strategy.

This time around, though, we would add energy stocks to the mix, along with gold. Crude oil climbed to an eight-month high over $70 yesterday. Bloomberg says the weakness in the U.S. dollar is, "bolstering the appeal of energy as an alternative investment." Sell bonds, buy energy. Pretty simple.

There is probably some truth to the fact that oil's latest move is driven by investment demand more than, say, demand growth in the real economy. But investors ARE looking for ways to profit from U.S. dollar weakness. Oil is liquid and popular. In the long-run, it's the smaller-than-expected oil supply growth that will drive the market.

By the way, some Diggers and Drillers subscribers have wondered exactly which of our energy recommendations come from our "Long Aftershock" scenario. We'll make sure to specify which oil and energy stocks we had in mind in tomorrow's weekly e-mail update (for subscribers only).

One thing Kris will probably be making clear to U.S. dollar-based investors is just how relatively attractive Australia's position is in the developed world. "Even as Australia's challenges increase, it will still be the envy of the developed world," writes William Pesek at Bloomberg. "Even in its worst moments... Australia is among the least unsightly economies anywhere," he adds rather optimistically. We'll see about that.

Finally, we meant to write a bit about other possibilities in China today. That is, we were going to explore collapse scenarios (financial, political, and societal). But we did not realise it would be ambitious to try that in a few hundred words. So look for something more considered later this week in the essay spot.

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• A Simpleton’s Trade: Sell US Stocks and Buy Gold
• The Bailout is Approve So Now It’s Time to Buy Gold
• Sell China and Buy Goldman Sachs
• LNG – The Energy Play for 2009
• Note to Australia: Buy Resources, Not Banks

But first, the market action. Crude oil kept on keeping on and closed up 3.4% in New York at $68.58 a barrel. Oil is up 54% this year.

Overall, the Reuters/Jeffries commodities index was up 3.07%. Oil, copper, gold, stocks, the euro-pretty much anything that is NOT the U.S. dollar or U.S. Treasury notes and bonds-is going up. At 81 cents versus the greenback, the Aussie dollar is at an eight-month high.

So it's happening again. Can't you see? Everyone is moving out of U.S. Treasuries and into commodities and stocks because the recession is over! Demand for government debt is falling. Demand for risk is rising! Dollar weakness equals economic strength!

Well. Maybe not. But that's the story that's being spun today. China's Purchasing Manager's Index expanded for the third month in a row. The dragon is breathing fire and building roads. "By the end of April, China had built 20,000 kilometres (12,430 miles) of rural roads, 214,000 low-rent homes, 445 kilometres of highway, and 100,000 square meters (1.08 million square feet) of airport buildings under the stimulus plan," reported China's National Development and Reform Commission on May 21.

Talk about shovel ready.

The Chinese surge in building and construction activity goes a long way to explaining the pickup in base metals prices and base metal stocks. But that just makes yesterday's news even more curious. Matthew Murphy over at the Age reports that the China Iron and Steel Association (CISA) has rejected the benchmark iron ore price negotiated last week between Rio Tinto and Japanese and Korean Steel mills.

That agreement cut the annual contract price for fine ores by 33% and for lump ores by 44%. According to Chamber's report, the CISA is rejecting the agreement because, "those cuts did not reflect the real supply and demand situation in the international market." "These prices do not reflect a mutually beneficial, win-win relationship for steel makers and iron ore suppliers," said a CISA statement. "CISA therefore cannot accept these prices and will not follow them."

We'll see about that. Maybe the Chinese are pushing for an even bigger cut. This is the peculiarity of the iron ore pricing system. Prices are negotiated between producers and consumers (Asian steel makers) on an annual basis. Last year, that worked out great for BHP and Rio Tinto. The 2008 contract price average was nearly double the 2007 price.

This year, even with a 45% cut from the 2008 price, the eventual price will still be higher than the 2007 price. That's not bad at all for Aussie ore producers, considering how awful business has been for everyone everywhere else. It shows a lot more resiliency in pricing-and a lot stronger Chinese demand-than you might expect.

What does it mean for shares? Well, if the price cuts in the contract price are smaller than expected, traders are going to revalue the ore producers at the new contract price. And of course, we're assuming that Chinese steel production is going to remain stable.

There is always the possibility that there is already way too much capacity in the Chinese steel industry and that ore demand, as resilient as it is, does not reflect a sustainable economic situation. But we'll just have to see about that won't we?

Whatever the fate of Chinese steel production, it's pretty clear China is beginning to swing its economic weight around. U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was in Beijing promising that the U.S. would be a good borrower and reduce its deficits and not to worry about them so much and just make nice please and stop worrying and smile for the cameras would you please?

Meanwhile, former Chinese central bank adviser Yu Yongding was more direct. "I wish to tell the U.S. government: 'Don't be complacent and think there isn't any alternative for China to buy your bills and bonds','' Yu said in an interview yesterday. "The euro is an alternative. And there are lots of raw materials we can still buy.''

Yes, there are. And by the way, why not a gold exploration boom? Gold mining requires lower capital overheads than bulk materials extraction. And with a rising gold price, it's worth a punt. If the gold mania really takes off (it's starting), look for a boom in the junior explorers.

But back to Yu. Yu has encouraged the U.S. to think about China's interests, "So that your own interest can be protected...You should not try to inflate away your debt burden." He hinted that if the U.S. does that, China has options like the euro. "Yes, some people say the euro is very weak...Okay, weak is good, we'll buy very cheap.''

The man is both a psychic and a good trader. He is also a moralist with an old fashioned sense of fiscal responsibility. "The borrower should keep their promises...The U.S. should be a responsible country."

Note to Yu. U.S. central bankers and government policy makers gave up being responsible a long time ago. 1913, 1971, 1980...take your pick. The policy of perpetual debt and gradual inflation has been around for nearly a century now. The only trouble is that the liability side of the Federal balance sheet has exploded. Hence the need for greater inflation via quantitative easing...and the situation we all find ourselves in today.

It's just the sort of thing that could trigger another dollar crisis. And THAT is what's really behind the market moves, we think. It's not a cyclical rotation out of bonds into higher risk assets because everything's peachy. It's a stealth retreat from U.S. bonds under the covering story of economic recovery.

But what's really going on is that investors are heading for the door on U.S. debt. Ten-year yields spiked again today and bond prices fell. Goldman Sachs reckons the U.S. will have to borrow over $3 trillion this year to finance new deficits and roll over old ones. And if it can't borrow it, the Fed will have to buy it.

For some reason, the Fed is confused about why bond yields are rising. A Reuters headline reads, "Federal Reserve puzzled by yield curve steepening." Are investors ditching the dollar and U.S. bonds because the U.S. credit rating is in jeopardy? Is the huge new supply of debt causing the Bond Vigilantes to protest inflation and punish President Obama buy selling bonds? Or are investors just so confident in the economy now that they feel no need to hide out in the government bond market until they get the all clear signal?

Hmm. What's so confusing again?

A few years ago, we called it "The Money Migration." That still seems like the right description today. You've got a debtor nation whose largest corporate institutions are failing (perhaps a preview of State failure). It's shipped its industrial infrastructure off-shore and replaced it with a financial industry that thrived on credit and derivatives. And now you wonder why investors are pushing interest rates on your debt up?

It's not hard to see who's in the global driver's seat now. It's creditors and producers. And for Australia's sake, that's good news. Because the world's largest creditor and producer is keenly interested in Australian assets, both as a hedge against the fading greenback and as a key input to its long-term expansion, which seems to be coming along just fine for now.

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Chinese Steel Price to Rise in Wake of Coal and Iron Price Hike
• Red Bear Rising: Russia’s Resource Based Geopolitical Strategy
• Surge in Chinese Bank Lending in 2009 Leads to Fall in Bank Capital
• Gorgon LNG Deal with China a Really Big Deal
• RBA Leaves Rates Unchanged, Rio Wraps Up Negotiations

If we're using numbers instead of metaphors, we'd say the CRB Reuters/Jeffries Index had its biggest monthly rally in 34 years. It was up 14% on the month. That was the best performance since July of 1974.

A monthly performance like that can only mean one thing. We're just not sure what one thing it is. It could mean commodities have rebounded from being oversold, as they were in late 2008. It could mean that markets are less pessimistic about the global economy than your editor at the Old Hat Factory (though we doubt that).

It could also mean that investors increasingly prefer tangible assets as a long-term growth strategy over financial assets. Even after $1.465 trillion in realised losses by global banks and financial institutions, there are trillions more to come. Commercial real estate...the option-ARM recast period in the U.S. housing market...European banks...any or all of these things could conspire to lead to more losses and more capital raisings in the financial sector.

Perhaps that is what explains crude oil's biggest monthly gain in a decade. July crude futures traded at $66.52 in Friday's New York action. The U.S. dollar price of gold powered to $981.20, before sliding back a bit $975.

The Aussie gold price is fighting its way up despite the fact that the Aussie dollar keeps gaining on the greenback. While the Aussie gold price is up just $1.71 in the last 30 days (0.14%), the U.S. gold price is up nearly nine percent. We reckon the Aussie gold price will begin moving up closer to $1,500 again on a combination of events (weakness against the greenback for one.)

There are also two data releases this week that will affect the Aussie dollar. The RBA meets tomorrow to decide the price of money in Australia (set interest rates). And then Wednesday, the March quarter GDP figures come out. This will tell us how bad the recession is, although not how bad it may become.

It's no use predicting these things. But for what it's worth, our view is that we're in a bit of a plateau between down moves. The "down moves" will come again in financial stocks, although they may not be as "down" as before, and employment. Mostly, the indices are going to have to price in very slow GDP growth for the remainder of the year and more job losses.

The wildcard for Australia is trade. Its proximity to Asia means that a rebound in that part of the world provides some cushion to resource companies. But then, we thought the resource stocks would be pretty well insulated from the first round of deleveraging too, and we were wrong about that. And the second time around?

Well, even if the long-term underlying demand for Aussie resources is real and growing, it still takes real money to make new projects happen. The financing of resource projects will continue to be a key issue in your stock selection. The other issue, obviously, is the direction of commodity prices.

Take LNG, for example. Last year the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association said it wanted to triple Australia's LNG output to sixty million tonnes per year. Meeting this weekend in Darwin, the group says 50 million is a more realistic target, given both the slump in energy prices and tight credit markets.

If LNG prices track oil prices-as they did in the big run up to $150 per barrel for crude-the economics of big Aussie projects get a lot better. Our view is that energy prices are going structurally higher anyway. Global recession aside, the big plunge in energy capital spending virtually guarantees a supply shortage in the coming years anyway.

Besides, you have to wonder why big international energy firms would be investing in conventional and unconventional Australian LNG projects if they weren't convinced that a) oil prices were going higher, or b) more carbon-friendly fuels like gas would gain as coal gets politically demonised and punished with cap-and-trade or emissions-trading-schemes.

Obviously, if global trade continues to contract and a second round of losses in the global banking industry triggers another financial crisis, demand for energy is going to fall. And while we're at it, stocks would probably test the 2003 lows too. We enter a new stage of grimness.

In the meantime, energy and precious metals stocks are riding higher commodity prices. And there's a distinctly 2007 mind-set in the air. It's vogue to be long-commodities and indifferent to risks in the financial system. It's enough to make an investor with a short memory nervous. More on that tomorrow.

Dan Denning
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

• Red Bear Rising: Russia’s Resource Based Geopolitical Strategy
• A Sovereign Debt Crisis Bullish for U.S. Dollar and Bearish for Gold
• Big Australian Resource Stocks Up 24% in 2008
• Equity Shareholders Are Wiped Out As Financial Shares Plummet
• CRB Commodities Index Has Largest Decline in 50 Years