There are a number of variables involved with the overall commodity sector, and oil is affected just as much as all the commodities.
Some of the obvious factors are the economic slowdown, forced liquidation and deleveraging that have had the type of impact that has caused commodities to be very volatile, in contrast to their normal predictable behavior in an economic slump.
For example, gold would usually be considered the place for investors to put their money when recession times like this are upon us. But gold hasn't skyrocketed the way it normally would have, although signs are it's starting to do that now, along with silver, platinum and other precious metals.
Oil prices especially are affected by the economy, as consumers stay home rather than using their disposable income on gas. That has caused oil stockpiles to rise and prices to plunge. The oil surplus has alos caused gas prices to fall in a major way as well.
In an attempt to put a halt to the surplus, OPEC is cutting oil production even more in an effort to shore up prices. Oil companies have cut back on drilling too, as the lower prices keep them from keeping too many wells in production.
Even though stocks have risen a little recently, traders are starting to look again to commodities as their choice of investment. U.S. dollar related investments are becoming increasingly risky in this environment, as the government goes into horrid debt, which the Federal Reserve will have to pay for by keeping the printing presses running full time.
Those who think the proposed Obama stimulus plan will change this are in for a big surprise, as it will only add fuel to the fire, and will do nothing to help the market. In truth, the market doesn't need to be helped, and the Obama big government machine needs to realize that.
While futures traders are looking more favorably at precious metals, they're puzzled about oil, as it seems many are attempting to make it look like it's going to continue to go up, but the underlying fundamentals aren't pointing that way.
No matter what OPEC or others attempt to do to inflate the prices, the higher oil goes, the less people will buy. Demand will go down, and prices with it. What will the government do, implement oil price controls? That's already proven to be a horrible failure which will launch oil shortages. History has proven this is always the result of price controls.
Consequently, the idea that oil stockplies will decline is ludicrous, for the reasons stated above. People holding tight to their money aren't going to change their habits when oil prices rise. They didn't do it when prices had plunged far below the current levels.
To underscore that, even as oil prices have risen for a couple weeks, so has crude inventories in the U.S., rising by 14 million barrels in just three weeks, says the Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration.
I'm not sure where oil industry watchers think the commodity will continue to rise, but it's a fallacy, and those betting on it are going to lose big time.
Some people think oil is totally unpredictable, as they're moving away from supply and demand, and instead are looking at governments who are attempting to game the market by their bailouts and cutting of oil production. Those artificial efforts are useless.
Commodity prices will rise in 2009, but oil won't be included in that basket. It may rise some, but the trend will continue for some time. It's moving lockstep with the economy, and people have stopped spending their money on travel. Nothing a government can do will change that reality.
Oil is one commodity I would short. Unless there's something unknown that happens, that will be the reality for some time to come.
Everything on commodities brokers, futures trading, commodities trading, gold, silver, futures brokers, oil futures, business news, markets and commodities options ...
Showing posts with label Obama Energy Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama Energy Policy. Show all posts
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Commodities: Obama's Failed Ethanol Policy
Ethanol as a viable commodity is a joke, yet Obama following same failed Bush policies
The more things "change," the more they stay the same, and that is how it will be with Barack Obama and the ongoing ethanol debacle in America.
With Obama, it's obvious the reasons why, as government subsidies pour into his home state of Illinois, the nations second-largest producer of corn.
Obama campaign senior energy adviser Heather Zichal said concerning Obama's ethanol policy that "Obama recognizes how important the renewable and biofuels industry is to creating jobs and meeting our goal of reducing dependence on foreign oil. He's fully committed to it and sees tremendous value in the renewable fuels standard and continuing down this path."
So the man of change is going to keep the Bush policy goal of a "minimum of 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022," said Zichal. At this time ethanol loses close to 66 cents a gallon at existing prices.
Oil refiners receive a subsidy of 51 cents a gallon for the ethanol mixed with regular gasoline, and a stiff 54 cent-a-gallon tariff is put on the sugarcane-based ethanol from Brazil.
The continued idiocy of saying we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil when we have billions upon billions of barrels proven to be on American soil or off its coastlines is dishonest at best.
There is no way the corn-based ethanol industry currently touted can survive, no matter what the government says. The idea now being thrown about is to use cellulosic ethanol, which is made from non-food crops.
One major problem is it costs about twice as much as corn-based ethanol to produce. Another is it's years away from being any significant contributor to our energy needs, if it ever will be. We need answers in the near future, not 10 or more years from now.
The corn-based ethanol problem is even worse, as it has already caused a lot of pain to poor people around the world who suffered from the resultant high food prices from the misguided effort, and riots ensued in a number of countries because of skyrocketing food costs.
Another huge problem is the increased costs to meat producers in the U.S., who have been damaged greatly from higher feed costs.
This is one area we need to simply toss aside and refuse to bring politics into. The damage is extensive and it'll only get worse if we keep going in this direction.
I wonder if this is the type of "change" Obama was supposedly going to initiate? This ethanol policy and the resultant illusion that it's a real commodity continues to be destructive, as shown by the damage it does to small engine power equipment like chainsaws, snowmobiles and generators.
The more things "change," the more they stay the same, and that is how it will be with Barack Obama and the ongoing ethanol debacle in America.
With Obama, it's obvious the reasons why, as government subsidies pour into his home state of Illinois, the nations second-largest producer of corn.
Obama campaign senior energy adviser Heather Zichal said concerning Obama's ethanol policy that "Obama recognizes how important the renewable and biofuels industry is to creating jobs and meeting our goal of reducing dependence on foreign oil. He's fully committed to it and sees tremendous value in the renewable fuels standard and continuing down this path."
So the man of change is going to keep the Bush policy goal of a "minimum of 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022," said Zichal. At this time ethanol loses close to 66 cents a gallon at existing prices.
Oil refiners receive a subsidy of 51 cents a gallon for the ethanol mixed with regular gasoline, and a stiff 54 cent-a-gallon tariff is put on the sugarcane-based ethanol from Brazil.
The continued idiocy of saying we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil when we have billions upon billions of barrels proven to be on American soil or off its coastlines is dishonest at best.
There is no way the corn-based ethanol industry currently touted can survive, no matter what the government says. The idea now being thrown about is to use cellulosic ethanol, which is made from non-food crops.
One major problem is it costs about twice as much as corn-based ethanol to produce. Another is it's years away from being any significant contributor to our energy needs, if it ever will be. We need answers in the near future, not 10 or more years from now.
The corn-based ethanol problem is even worse, as it has already caused a lot of pain to poor people around the world who suffered from the resultant high food prices from the misguided effort, and riots ensued in a number of countries because of skyrocketing food costs.
Another huge problem is the increased costs to meat producers in the U.S., who have been damaged greatly from higher feed costs.
This is one area we need to simply toss aside and refuse to bring politics into. The damage is extensive and it'll only get worse if we keep going in this direction.
I wonder if this is the type of "change" Obama was supposedly going to initiate? This ethanol policy and the resultant illusion that it's a real commodity continues to be destructive, as shown by the damage it does to small engine power equipment like chainsaws, snowmobiles and generators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)