Trump’s radical new foreign policy portends much worse to come

Trump Blows Off the Rest of the World

Trump Climate Change Speech More About Political Power Than Climate Change

Donald Trump and Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte

Fareed Zakaria has pointed out this week in the Washington Post and on CNN GPS, that we now have a Trump foreign policy doctrine, and it is not reassuring for the World. It is openly declaring its intent to destroy the World as we know it. New York Times Conservative columnist David Brooks reached the same conclusion. Obviously heavily influenced by Bannon, who many had thought had been relegated to backseat status by McMaster, we have been fooled again. As Trump demonstrates his Henry Kissinger RealPolitik admiration for authoritarians like Putin, Xi Jinping, Erdogan, and Duterte, more sinister scenarios begin to crystallize.  Trump’s speech justifying the withdrawal of the United States from the COP21 Paris Climate Change Agreement is a frightening exposition of this new Trump Doctrine. It is Trump thumbing his nose at the World. It is the United States against the World, led by a coterie of plutocrats and their money.  It was moved along by a campaign carefully crafted by fossil fuel industry players, most notably Charles D. Koch and David H. Koch, the Kansas-based billionaires who run a chain of refineries (which can process 600,000 barrels of crude oil per day) as well as a subsidiary that owns or operates 4,000 miles of pipelines that move crude oil. The reality is that the evidence points to an ongoing seizure of executive power by Trump that destroys our Constitution in the name of our national security.  The big rhetorical question is what we can do about it?

Read more: Gary Cohn and H.R. McMaster Wall Street Journal editorial: The New Trump Foreign Policy Doctrine

Read more: Fareed Zakaria Washington Post editorial: Trump’s radical departure from postwar foreign policy – The Washington Post

Read more: David Brooks New York Times editorial:

Read more:

 

China warns Trump against abandoning climate change deal

  “Climate change is not, as rumored, a hoax created by the Chinese.” — Liu Zhenmin, China’s deputy minister of foreign affairs

China likely to fill climate change global leadership void on U.S. departure

We are now seeing the first indications of the consequences of  a Trump withdrawal from the international community. China has seen an opportunity to displace the United States and to advance China’s own aspirations to take a more aggressive and visible leadership role in the COP21 agreement. The simultaneous announcement of the de facto death of the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) has also opened a new opportunity for Chinese hegemony in the Asian economic and geopolitical world. Regardless of the Trumpist views on climate change and foreign trade, we are proverbially cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

Source: China warns Trump against abandoning climate change deal

Beijing pushes for progress to prevent global warming, saying that the world wants to co-operate

 

Delegates at the international climate conference in Marrakesh

NOVEMBER 11, 2016, FINANCIAL TIMES

by: Pilita Clark in Marrakesh

China has warned Donald Trump that he will be defying the wishes of the entire planet if he acts on his vow to back away from the Paris climate agreement after he becomes US president next January.  In a sign of how far the world has shifted in recognizing the need to tackle global warming, Beijing — once seen as an obstructive force in UN climate talks — is now leading the push for progress by responding to fears that Mr. Trump would pull the US out of the landmark accord.

“It is global society’s will that all want to co-operate to combat climate change,” a senior Beijing negotiator said in Marrakesh on Friday, at the first round of UN talks since the Paris deal was sealed last December. The Chinese negotiators added that “any movement by the new US government” would not affect their transition towards becoming a greener economy.

India also joined in the warnings, saying Mr. Trump’s appointment would force countries to reassess an accord hailed as an end to the fossil fuel era.

“Everyone will rethink how this whole process is going to unfold,” India’s chief negotiator, Ravi Prasad, told the Financial Times.

As delegates descend on the Moroccan city of Marrakesh for the latest UN talks on tackling global warming, further progress has been thrown into doubt by the election of Donald Trump, a climate change skeptic, as the next US president.

Recalling the way support for the earlier Kyoto protocol climate treaty crumbled after it was abandoned by another Republican president, George W Bush, Mr. Prasad said he feared the Paris accord could suffer “a contagious disease that spreads” if the US withdrew.

Mr. Trump’s sweeping victory on Tuesday has shaken what had appeared to be an unstoppable bout of global action to tackle climate change in the run-up to the two-week Marrakesh talks, which began on Monday.

Governments struck the first climate deal for aviation in October, just days before agreeing to phase out planet-warming hydrofluorocarbon chemicals used in air-conditioners.

The Moroccan hosts of this week’s talks had been planning a celebratory meeting to cap this unprecedented bout of activity. Instead, organizers awoke on Wednesday morning to find the world’s wealthiest country had a president-elect who has called global warming a hoax, pledged to “cancel” the Paris agreement and vowed to stop US funding of UN climate programs entirely.

“They were in absolute shock,” said one person who saw Moroccan officials on Wednesday morning.

Adnan Amin, the director-general of the International Renewable Energy Agency, said “a sense of helplessness” had pervaded the Marrakesh talks, and “a certain amount of fear”.

The EU and Japan also reaffirmed their commitment to the agreement, which requires all countries to come up with a plan to curb climate change in order to stop global temperatures from rising more than 2C from pre-industrial times.

But neither they nor China were willing to offer extra cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to fill the vacuum a US withdrawal would create, nor additional money for an agreement requiring billions of dollars in public and private funds to be channeled from rich to poor countries to tackle climate change.

At 3am in the morning I started to hear the [US election] results and I said, ‘No, you’re having a nightmare, go back to sleep’. When I got up and realised it was true, I walked around in a daze

“If the US changes its position that would be very serious for us, especially the aspect of the finance,” said Shigeru Ushio, a Japanese foreign ministry official.

As delegates absorbed the ramifications of Mr. Trump’s sweeping victory, many swapped stories of how the result had hit them.

“At 3am in the morning I started to hear the results and I said, ‘No, you’re having a nightmare, go back to sleep’,” said one developing country participant. “When I got up and realized it was true, this was really, really happening, I walked around in a daze. I think a lot of us were.”

The negotiations have continued nonetheless and some countries have been adamant that the US election result should not interfere with a meeting that is due to start negotiating a raft of important rules for how the Paris agreement will operate.

“We’re talking about the big challenge of climate change,” said Russia’s lead negotiator, Oleg Shamanov. “This issue is bigger than life. This is a long-term issue, longer than any mandate of any president of country X or Z, even if that country is a big one.”

The prospect of the US withdrawing from the Paris agreement has been a topic of endless discussion beneath the sun-shaded walkways in the temporary convention center built for the Marrakesh meeting.

A pullout would take four years unless Mr. Trump chose to take the US out of the accord’s parent treaty, the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, in which case it could only take a year.

That would be a highly provocative move, said international climate law expert, Farhana Yamin. “It would escalate non-cooperation to the highest level possible.”

But as the first week of the talks drew to a close, a mood of defiance was emerging among some delegates who said past US retreats from UN climate action had only spurred other countries’ determination to unify and proceed.

“The talk in the corridors is, ‘OK, this is not going to stop us from moving forward, we will just redouble our efforts’,” said Hugh Sealy, a lead negotiator for an alliance of small island countries.

“This is still an existential threat,” he said. “I still want to pass on that little house I have on the coast in Grenada to my children and the rest of us are going to have to step up.”

Leonardo DiCaprio’s “Before The Flood” Documentary Free Everywhere

The Urgency of Climate Change Action Made Vividly Real

Leonardo DiCaprio‘s extraordinary two-hour National Geographic documentary is now available for viewing free everywhere, including on this page, YouTube, The National Geographic website, and the National Geographic Channel. Everyone should watch it.  Equally worthwhile is the series The Year of Living Dangerously on National Geographic.  The 2-minute trailer and the full documentary film are below here.

The Years of Living Dangerously on National Geographic:

What the Paris Climate Meeting Must Do

Le Bourget airport just north of Paris is the place where Charles Lindbergh landed the Spirit of St. Louis. That event 88 years ago could now be interpreted as foreshadowing the era of globalization. Tomorrow, the world’s nations will meet there under the banner of the UN Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  COP21, also known as the 2015 Paris Climate Conference, will, for the first time in over 20 years of UN negotiations, aim to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate, with the aim of keeping global warming below 2°C.

Read More: COP21: What’s It All About?

THE NEW YORK TIMES

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD NOV. 28, 2015

In 1992, more than 150 nations agreed at a meeting in Rio de Janeiro to take steps to stabilize greenhouse gases at a level that would “prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” — United Nations-speak for global warming.

Many follow-up meetings have been held since then, with little to show for them. Emissions of greenhouse gases have steadily risen, as have atmospheric temperatures, while the consequences of unchecked warming — persistent droughts, melting glaciers and ice caps, dying corals, a slow but inexorable sea level rise — have become ever more pronounced.

On Monday, in Paris, the signatories to the Rio treaty (now 196), will try once again to fashion an international climate change agreement that might actually slow, then reduce, emissions and prevent the world from tipping over into full-scale catastrophe late in this century. As with other climate meetings, notably Kyoto in 1997 and Copenhagen in 2009, Paris is being advertised as a watershed event — “our last hope,” in the words of Fatih Birol, the new director of the International Energy Agency. As President François Hollande of France put it recently, “We are duty-bound to succeed.”

Paris will almost certainly not produce an ironclad, planet-saving agreement in two weeks. But it can succeed in an important way that earlier meetings have not — by fostering collective responsibility, a strong sense among countries large and small, rich and poor, that all must play a part in finding a global solution to a global problem.

Kyoto failed because it imposed emissions reduction targets only on developed countries, giving developing nations like China, India and Brazil a free pass. That doomed it in the United States Senate. Copenhagen attracted wider participation, but it broke up in disarray, in part because of continuing frictions between the industrialized nations and the developing countries.

The organizers of the Paris conference have learned a lot from past mistakes. Instead of pursuing a top-down agreement with mandated targets, they have asked every country to submit a national plan that lays out how and by how much they plan to reduce emissions in the years ahead. So far, more than 170 countries, accounting for over 90 percent of global greenhouse emissions, have submitted pledges, and more may emerge in Paris.

Will these pledges be enough to ward off the worst consequences of global warming? No. Scientists generally agree that global warming must not exceed 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, from preindustrial levels. Various studies say that even if countries that have made pledges were to follow through on them, the world will heat up by 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of this century. That would still be much too high, and it would be guaranteed to make life miserable for future generations, especially in poor low-lying countries. But it would at least put the world on a safer trajectory; under most business-as-usual models, temperature increases could reach 8.1 degrees or higher.

Eventually, of course, all nations will have to improve on their pledges, especially big emitters like China, India and the United States. If the Paris meeting is to be a genuine turning point, negotiators must make sure that the national pledges are the floor, not the ceiling of ambition, by establishing a framework requiring stronger climate commitments at regular intervals — say, every five years. This should be accompanied by a plan for monitoring and reporting each country’s performance. Earlier meetings have done poorly on this score.

Other important items dot the agenda. One is how rich nations can help poorer ones achieve their targets. Another is stopping the destruction of tropical forests, which play a huge role in storing carbon and absorbing emissions. The meeting also seeks to enlist investors, corporations, states and cities in the cause. Michael Bloomberg, who made reducing emissions a priority as mayor of New York, will join the mayor of Paris in co-hosting a gathering of local officials from around the world.

The test of success for this much-anticipated summit meeting is whether it produces not only stronger commitments but also a shared sense of urgency at all levels to meet them.

CNN Money: Canada’s Economy Is A Disaster From Low Oil Prices

The evidence of a Canadian economic train wreck just keep rolling in. This report from CNN Money mentions last week’s Bank of Canada dismal report on the Canadian economy, and goes on to add additional economic data and comment from respected investment banks around the World. The one glaring omission is any political discussion of how Canada got into this mess, and who is responsible for it.

Canada’s economy is a disaster from low oil prices

By Nick Cunningham for Oilprice.com @CNNMoneyInvest

Low oil prices are threatening the health of Canada’s oil and gas sector, which in turn, is causing turmoil in Canada’s economy as a whole.

The fall in oil prices is forcing billions of dollars in spending reductions for Canada’s oil and gas industry. In February, Royal Dutch Shell (RDSA) shelved plans for a tar sands project in Alberta that would have produced 200,000 barrels per day. Last year, Petronas put off plans to build a massive LNG export terminal on Canada’s west coast.

Moody’s recently predicted that very few of the 18 proposed LNG projects in Canada will be constructed. Most will be canceled. The oil industry is expected to lose 37% of its revenues in 2015, or a fall of CAD$43 billion.

That is bad news for Canada’s oil and gas sector. But even worse, Canada’s overdependence on oil and gas will threaten its broader economy now that the sector has gone bust.

The severe drop in oil prices has made the Canadian dollar one of the worst performing currencies in the world over the past year. The “loonie” used to trade at parity to the U.S. dollar, and even appreciated to a stronger level a few years ago, but now a Canadian dollar gets you less than 80 U.S. cents.

Disaster levels: While a weaker currency has complicating effects on the economy (it will also boost exports, for example), on balance low oil prices have been an unmitigated disaster for Canada’s economy.

Canada’s GDP “fell off a cliff” in January of this year, according to a report from Capital Economics, a consultancy. Canada’s economy could be shrinking by 1% on an annualized basis. For the full year, Capital Economics predicts growth of 1.5%, followed by a weak 1% expansion in 2016.

“Overall, unless oil prices rebound soon, the economy is likely to struggle much longer than the consensus view implies, even as the improving US economy supports stronger non-energy exports,” Capital Economics concluded. Other economic analysts agree.

Nomura Securities worries about “contagion,” as the collapse in oil prices lead to less drilling, declining demand for supporting services, falling housing prices, a sinking stock market, and weakness in other sectors like construction and engineering. The pain could be concentrated in Alberta in particular, where household debt averages CAD$124,838, compared to just CAD$76,150 for the rest of Canada. Now with the rug pulled out beneath the economy, there could be a day of reckoning.

High-cost oil: Much of Canada’s oil production comes from high-cost tar sands. When they are up and running, tar sands operations can produce relatively more stable outputs than shale, which suffers from rapid decline rates. But, nevertheless, tar sands are extremely costly, with breakeven prices at $60 to $80 per barrel for steam-assisted extraction and a whopping $90 to $100 per barrel for tar sands mining.
Even worse, Canada’s heavy oil trades at a discount to WTI, which makes it all the more painful when oil prices are low. The discount is nearly $12 per barrel below WTI right now. Some of that discount is the result of inadequate pipeline capacity, trapping some tar sands in Canada. The stalled Keystone XL pipeline is the most controversial, but not the only pipeline that has been blocked. The head of Canada’s Scotiabank recently warned that the inability to build enough energy infrastructure, plus Canada’s near total dependence on the U.S. market, puts Canada’s economy at risk.

The Bank of Canada surveyed the top executives at Canada’s 100 largest businesses found that two-thirds of them think it is critical to diversify the economy away from oil. With such a dependence on commodities, the oil bust has rippled through the economy, forcing layoffs and increasing unemployment. Consumer confidence is low, and hiring is at its lowest level since 2009, during the immediate aftermath of the global financial crisis.

Of course, diversification can only be achieved over the longer-term. In the near-term Canada’s fate is tied to the price of oil.

UBC Faculty Joins Other Prestigious Universities Calling for Fossil Fuel Divestment

The University of British Columbia is following the lead of faculty and students at Harvard University, the University of California, Stanford University and many other universities across North America.  Also of note, Norway’s sovereign investment fund, the largest in the World @ $1.3 Trillion, has already made the decision to divest. The current fossil fuel market collapse and likely long term instability is prima facie evidence of the need for divestment, and to prevent further increases in carbon emissions.

UBC Faculty Open Letter Here: UBC Faculty Call For Fossil Fuel Divestment

This Big Idea is sweeping public and private institutional investment funds globally in the belief that it is overdue to begin more demonstrative action against human caused climate change.  Canadians have a particularly important role to play in this.  Current government policy has focused the economy on fossil fuels, at the expense of a broader based economy, and is now experiencing the wrath of the “natural resource curse. Canadian innovation and productivity have plummeted on the OECD scale, and Canada is entering a highly volatile and uncertain recessionary period, as forecast by The Conference Board of Canada, the International Monetary Fund, and numerous Canadian banks.

From the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation:

Faculty at the University of British Columbia have voted in favour of the institution divesting its existing fossil fuel holdings and forgoing further investments in companies connected with fossil fuels.

“Students have spoken. Faculty have spoken. It’s time for UBC to act,” George Hoberg, professor in forest resources management, said in a statement. “Climate change presents an urgent crisis for humanity.”

The results of the referendum were released Tuesday, with 62 per cent of voters supporting divestment.

A fossil-free portfolio

Of UBC’s $1.2-billion endowment fund, more than $100 million is invested in oil, natural gas and coal. The faculty vote is calling on the university to divest completely from those holdings within five years.

“Just as UBC has pledged to use its campus as a ‘living laboratory’ for sustainability, we call on our university to apply its expertise with the same vigour to the endowment,” said Kathryn Harrison, professor of political science and a climate policy expert.

“UBC should devise a profitable, fossil-free portfolio that can serve as an inspiration for sustainable investing by other institutions.”

The faculty will now put their proposal to the university’s board of governors.

“UBC is a place of academic dialogue and debate, and we welcome our faculty members’ interest in our investment policies,” the university said in a statement responding to today’s result. “As the trustee of the endowment, UBC has a fiduciary obligation to ensure that it is managed prudently.”

A growing movement

The fossil fuel divestment movement started in the United States and has spread across North America and Canada.

Last year, UBC students held their own referendum on the issue, with an almost four-to-one vote in favour of divestment.

Today’s vote comes just before Global Divestment Day on Friday when, the UBC campaigners say, a divestment campaign will be launched at the University of Calgary.

Preparing For The Long Term Consequences In Texas And Western Canada

UPDATE: January 20, 2015. Target announced this week that it will be closing all 133 stores in Canada, including the Vernon and Kelowna stores. eliminating at least a couple of hundred local $10/hr jobs and a handful of slightly better paid management jobs. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Target’s 17,000 + Canadian layoffs of low income workers will be the largest in Canadian history.

OPEC Report Downgrades Demand for Its Oil as Prices Fall Again

The growing downturn in the fossil fuels industry has extraordinary implications globally.  While some are proposing theories that this downturn will be short-lived, there simply isn’t much evidence to support an optimistic forecast.  Saudi Arabia is openly executing a long term strategy to squeeze “high cost oil producers,” using its unquestioned leverage and the lowest production costs in the World.  Europe is facing potential deflation, and the current European recession is forcing the European Central Bank to begin “quantitative easing,” beginning this week, essentially printing money.  The Russian economy is in shambles as the ruble weakens, something Putin did not plan on occurring.  The Chinese economy has weakened sharply and will likely remain weak into the near foreseeable future. Meanwhile Canada is at the mercy of these global forces, with little in the way of economic reserves to defend its economy, having bet the entire Canadian economy on oil. Somehow Joe Oliver promised he would balance the Canadian budget in 2015, and then the next day, Oliver ate crow, and walked back his promise.  In a surprise move, The Bank of Canada then reduced the lending rate to 0.75%, causing the loonie to plummet below 81 cents. Things are not what the government wants us to believe.

There are significant hedge bets in the market that oil will soon return to $100 per barrel. A prominent optimistic theory suggests that Saudi Arabia and the United States are collaborating to squeeze Putin and the Russian oil economy, and oil will bounce back within 90 days. However, most economists and oil industry analysts are projecting a much longer and deeper petroleum industry recession than in the 1980’s, for example.  The predominant view is that it will persist for at least five years or longer.

In Texas, Hunkering Down for the Oil Bust

Reblogged from The New York Times

By CLIFFORD KRAUSSJAN. 19, 2015

MIDLAND, Tex. — With oil prices plummetingby more than 50 percent since June, the gleeful mood of recent years has turned glum here in West Texas as the frenzy of shale oil drilling has come to a screeching halt.

Every day, oil companies are decommissioning rigs and announcing layoffs. Small firms that lease equipment have fallen behind in their payments.

In response, businesses and workers are getting ready for the worst. A Mexican restaurant has started a Sunday brunch to expand its revenues beyond dinner. A Mercedes dealer, anticipating reduced demand, is prepared to emphasize repairs and sales of used cars. And people are cutting back at home, rethinking their vacation plans and cutting the hours of their housemaids and gardeners.

Dexter Allred, the general manager of a local oil field service company, began farming alfalfa hay on the side some years ago in the event that oil prices declined and work dried up. He was taking a cue from his grandfather, Homer Alf Swinson, an oil field mechanic, who opened a coin-operated carwash in 1968 — just in case.

Photo

Homer Alf Swinson, left, an oil field mechanic, opened a coin-operated carwash in 1968 — just in case oil prices declined. CreditMichael Stravato for The New York Times

“We all have backup plans,” Mr. Allred said with laugh. “You can be sure oil will go up and down, the only question is when.”

Indeed, to residents here in the heart of the oil patch, booms and busts go with the territory.

“This is Midland and it’s just a way of life,” said David Cristiani, owner of a downtown jewelry store, who keeps a graph charting oil prices since the late 1990s on his desk to remind him that the good times don’t last forever. “We are always prepared for slowdowns. We just hunker down. They wrote off the Permian Basin in 1984, but the oil will always be here.”

It’s at times like these that Midland residents recall the wild swings of the 1980s, a decade that began with parties where people drank Dom Pérignon out of their cowboy boots. Rolls-Royce opened a dealership, and the local airport had trouble finding space to park all the private jets. By the end of the decade, the Rolls-Royce dealership was shut and replaced by a tortilla factory, and three banks had failed.

There has been nothing like that kind of excess over the past five years, despite the frenzy of drilling across the Permian Basin, the granddaddy of American oil fields. Set in a forsaken desert where tumbleweed drifts through long-forgotten towns, the region has undergone a renaissance in the last four years, with horizontal drilling and fracking reaching through multiple layers of shales stacked one over the other like a birthday cake.

But since the Permian Basin rig count peaked at around 570 last September, it has fallen to below 490 and local oil executives say the count will probably go down to as low as 300 by April unless prices rebound. The last time the rig count declined as rapidly was in late 2008 and early 2009, when the price of oil fell from over $140 to under $40 a barrel because of the financial crisis.

Unlike traditional oil wells, which cannot be turned on and off so easily, shale production can be cut back quickly, and so the field’s output should slow considerably by the end of the year.

The Dallas Federal Reserve recently estimated that the falling oil prices and other factors will reduce job growth in Texas overall from 3.6 percent in 2014 to as low as 2 percent this year, or a reduction of about 149,000 in jobs created.

Midland’s recent good fortune is plain to see. The city has grown in population from 108,000 in 2010 to 140,000 today, and there has been an explosion of hotel and apartment construction. Companies like Chevron and Occidental are building new local headquarters. Real estate values have roughly doubled over the past five years, according to Mayor Jerry Morales.

The city has built a new fire station and recruited new police officers with the infusion of new tax receipts, which increased by 19 percent from 2013 to 2014 alone. A new $14 million court building is scheduled to break ground next month. But the city has also put away $39 million in a rainy-day fund for the inevitable oil bust.

“This is just a cooling-off period,” Mayor Morales said. “We will prevail again.”

Expensive restaurants are still full and traffic around the city can be brutal. Still, everyone seems to sense that the pain is coming, and they are preparing for it.

Randy Perry, who makes $115,000 a year, plus bonuses, managing the rig crews at Elevation Resources, said he always has a backup plan.

“We are responding to survive, so that we may once again thrive when we come out the other side,” said Steven H. Pruett, president and chief executive of Elevation Resources, a Midland-based oil exploration and production company. “Six months ago there was a swagger in Midland and now that swagger is gone.”

Mr. Pruett’s company had six rigs running in early December but now has only three. It will go down to one by the end of the month, even though he must continue to pay a service company for two of the rigs because of a long-term contract.

The other day Mr. Pruett drove to a rig outside of Odessa he feels compelled to park to save cash, and he expressed concern that as many as 50 service workers could eventually lose their jobs.

But the workers themselves seemed stoic about their fortunes, if not upbeat.

“It’s always in the back of your mind — being laid off and not having the security of a regular job,” said Randy Perry, a tool-pusher who makes $115,000 a year, plus bonuses, managing the rig crews. But Mr. Perry said he always has a backup plan because layoffs are so common; even inevitable.

Since graduating from high school a decade ago, he has bought several houses in East Texas and fixed them up, doing the plumbing and electrical work himself. At age 29 with a wife and three children, he currently has three houses, and if he is let go, he says he could sell one for a profit he estimates at $50,000 to $100,000.

Just a few weeks ago, he and other employees received a note from Trent Latshaw, the head of his company, Latshaw Drilling, saying that layoffs may be necessary this year.

“The people of the older generation tell the young guys to save and invest the money you make and have cash flow just in case,” Mr. Perry said during a work break. “I feel like everything is going to be O.K. This is not going to last forever.”

The most nervous people in Midland seem to be the oil executives who say busts may be inevitable, but how long they last is anybody’s guess.

Over a lavish buffet lunch recently at the Petroleum Club of Midland, the talk was woeful and full of conspiracy theories about how the Saudis were refusing to cut supplies to vanquish the surging American oil industry.

“At $45 a barrel, it shuts down nearly every project,” Steve J. McCoy, Latshaw Drilling’s director of business development, told Mr. Pruett and his guests. “The Saudis understand and they are killing us.”

Mr. Pruett nodded in agreement, adding, “They are trash-talking the price of oil down.”

“Everyone has been saying `Happy New Year,’” Mr. Pruett continued. “Yeah, some happy new year.”

To See The Future Of The Western Canadian Economy Look To Texas

UPDATE: May 21, 2015.  Goldman Sachs has just released an oil price forecast suggesting that North Sea Brent crude will still be $55 in 2020, five years from now.  As Alberta’s Western Canadian Select (WCS) bitumen is valued lower on commodity markets this is extremely bad news for Canada. Further, the well-known Canadian economic forecasting firm, Enform is predicting that job losses across all of western Canada, not only Alberta, could reach 180,000. 

UPDATE: January 15, 2015. Target announced today that it will be closing all 133 stores in Canada, including the Vernon and Kelowna stores. eliminating at least a couple of hundred local $10/hr jobs and a handful of slightly better paid management jobs. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Target’s 17,000 + Canadian layoffs of low-income workers will be the largest in Canadian history.

To Understand Alberta’s Future, Look to Texas

Brace yourself. I haven’t gotten the sense that the coming economic bust in western Canada has yet sunk in with all Canadians. The problem is centered in Alberta, but radiates throughout western Canada, and even well beyond in complex ways. If you want to get a credible sense of what we are facing, you need only look to journals like The Wall Street Journal, CNN Money, Bloomberg and many others to get the evidence you may seek.  Kelowna Now‘s recent story on jobs in Kelowna noted a key issue locally: many of the employed in Kelowna work up north in the oil patch. Then there is the matter of the Nova Scotia workers in Fort MacMurray and their future. Closer to home than Texas, we should also consider the radiant job loss effect in places like North Dakota and Wyoming.  SF Gate has also reported 700 layoffs by a Canadian oil company in Bakersfield, California.  The “pollyanna’s” who are denying that this is happening are “whistling in the graveyard.”

Reblogged from The Wall Street Journal Blog:

Plunging Oil Prices Test Texas’ Economic Boom

Downturn Has Many Wondering How Lone Star State Will Weather a Bust

Oil tankers are loaded with crude in Corpus Christi, Texas, in December. The area has prospered in recent years due to the energy boom in the Eagle Ford shale formation, but falling prices could test that.

Retired Southwest Airlines co-founder Herb Kelleher remembers a Texas bumper sticker from the late 1980s, when falling energy prices triggered an ugly regional downturn: “Dear Lord, give me another boom and I promise I won’t screw it up.”

Texas got its wish with another energy-driven boom, and now plunging oil prices are testing whether the state has held up its end of the bargain.

The Lone Star State’s economy has been a national growth engine since the recession ended, expanding at a rate of 4.4% annually between 2009 and 2013, twice the pace of the U.S. as a whole.

The downturn in energy prices now has triggered a debate over whether Texas simply got lucky in recent years, thanks to a hydraulic-fracturing oil-and-gas boom, or whether it hit on an economic playbook that other states, and the country as a whole, could emulate.

One in seven jobs created nationally during the 50-month expansion has been created in Texas, where the unemployment rate, at 4.9%, is nearly a percentage point lower than the national average.

But a big dose of the state’s good fortune comes from the oil-and-gas sector. Midland, which sits atop the oil-rich Permian Basin, had the fastest weekly wage growth in the country among large countries: 9% in the 12 months ending June 2014.

Now that oil prices have plunged nearly 51% from their June peak to $52.69 a barrel, some Texans sobered by memories of past energy busts are bracing for a fall. The argument among economists and business leaders isn’t whether the state will be hurt, but how badly.

Mr. Kelleher is among the Texans predicting this won’t be a replay of the 1980s oil bust and banking crisis, which drove the state unemployment rate to 9.3%. As evidence, he and others cite a more cautious banking sector, a tax and regulatory environment favorable to business, and a state economy less dependent on energy and other resources.

“Texas has become a well-rounded state,” Mr. Kelleher said. “People did remember not to overextend themselves.”

Michael Feroli, a New York-based economist at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., is one of the skeptics of the “this-time-is-different” camp. Although the oil-and-gas industry today makes up a smaller share of Texas’ workforce than it did in the mid-1980s, it accounts for roughly the same share of its economic output, he said. So a decline in oil prices similar to the plunge of more than 50% seen in the mid-1980s, he said, could have a similar result: recession.

“If oil prices stay where they are, Texas is going to face a more difficult economic reality,” Mr. Feroli said.

Oil exploration companies already are scaling back drilling plans for next year. Oil-field-service companies that provide labor and machinery, such as Halliburton Co. andSchlumberger Ltd. , are laying off workers. The number of oil and gas rigs in Texas, which had grown 80% since the start of 2010, has been dropping over the past few weeks. The rig count in the state stood at 851 at the end of December, down from 905 in mid-November, according to oil-field-services firm Baker Hughes Inc., which compiles the data. Meanwhile, yields on junk bonds tied to energy companies have soared as investors brace for financial fallout from the oil-price bust.

Yet Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher likens the J.P. Morgan report to bull droppings. He noted that sectors including trade and transportation, leisure and hospitality, education and construction all have produced more new jobs in recent years than energy. Houston has experienced fast growth in the medical sector, Austin in technology.

“This is a test,” Mr. Fisher said. “Is Texas indeed as diversified as people like me say it is?”

ENLARGE

Analysts at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas estimate that a 45% decline in the price of oil—from $100 a barrel to near $55—will reduce Texas payrolls by 125,000, all else being equal. Payrolls were up 447,900 in November from a year earlier, or 3.9%. The Dallas Fed estimate implies growth of more than 300,000, or nearly 3%, even with a lower oil price, still faster than the national average of 2%.

Pia Orrenius, a Dallas Fed regional economist, sees the price bust washing through the Texas economy in both positive and negative ways. It could help the booming petrochemicals sector and manufacturing by lowering costs. A construction boom centered on petrochemical plants is already under way along the Gulf Coast, a source of blue-collar jobs. Yet the price bust will hurt sectors like construction, transportation and business services that have expanded to serve the oil industry, and consumer spending more broadly as workers lose their jobs.

“We will see significant spillovers,” Ms. Orrenius said.

Nowhere is the evolution of the Texas economy more apparent than in Houston, the nation’s fourth-largest city, with 2.2 million people.

After oil-and-gas prices crashed in the mid-1980s, energy companies in the city laid off thousands of petroleum engineers and other well-paid industry workers, and the real-estate market crumbled, helping trigger a regional-banking collapse. One in six homes and apartments in Houston stood vacant at the beginning of 1987, and the county tax rolls dropped by $8 billion, according to a history of the bust by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. That prompted civic leaders to push for an expanded medical sector and more diversified economy.

Today, the Texas Medical Center is the world’s largest medical complex, with more than 20 hospitals, three medical schools and six nursing schools, employing 106,000 people. Health-care and social-services companies made up 10.4% of jobs in the greater Houston area in 2013, compared with 5.9% in 1985, according to Labor Department data. Roughly 4.3% of jobs in the county were in the oil-and-gas industry last year, down from 5.9% in 1985.

Still, most of the 26 Fortune 500 companies based in Houston are in energy, includingPhillips 66 , Halliburton and Anadarko Petroleum Corp. , and energy employees flush with cash recently spurred a run-up in real-estate prices in the region that has raised red flags among some economists. Fitch Ratings recently declared that Houston home prices were the second-most overvalued in the country, behind Austin, when compared with historical averages, and that current prices may be unsustainable, citing the current oil-price drop.

The energy boom has strengthened the state’s budget. Revenues are expected to take a hit with falling levies on oil and natural gas production, but less than previously. The levies accounted for 9.4% of state tax revenue in 2013 compared with 20.2% in 1985, according to data from the Texas state comptroller’s office.

Texas banks also appear to be in better shape to handle a shock than they were in the 1980s. Between 1986 and 1990, more than 700 Texas banks and thrifts failed. During the worst of the last financial crisis in 2008 and 2009, seven Texas banks failed, according to the FDIC. Fewer than 1% of state banks have high measures of nonperforming loans now, compared with 20% in the late 1980s, according to the Dallas Fed.

Texas is the only state that limits home-equity borrowing to 80% of a home’s value, a provision enshrined in its state constitution. The rule helped keep Texas homeowners from piling up debt against their homes during the national real-estate boom of the 2000s. Only 10% of nonprime mortgages were underwater in 2011 in Texas, compared with 54% in the rest of the U.S., according to the Dallas Fed.

“Even though we saw our banking brethren in other states doing these crazy deals, we refused to do so because we remembered the ’80s,” said Pat Hickman, chief executive of Happy State Bank, a community bank in the Texas Panhandle. “We learned lessons.”

Texas has something else going for it: A bounty of resources other than oil and natural gas, most notably, land and people.

The state’s population grew 29% between 2000 and 2014, more than twice as fast as the U.S. as a whole, according to the Census Bureau. The median age in Texas was 34 last year, 3 1/2 years younger than the nation overall. Growth has come from a combination of migration from other states, immigration and a higher birthrate than the national average.

The U.S. economy has been restrained in recent years by slow labor-force growth. Texas, on the other hand, has more young people entering their prime working years and fewer elderly residents, as a percentage of the population, than does the nation overall. That has given its economy a solid foundation of available workers.

Workforce and land were two factors that drew Firefly Space Systems, a manufacturer of low-orbit rockets, to the Austin area earlier this year. The firm needed a place to launch test rockets and chose Texas over Los Angeles for an expansion. It found a supply of tech-savvy workers in the Austin area and plentiful land.

“It was the geography, and it was making sure our employees were comfortable there,” said Maureen Gannon, the firm’s vice president for business development. The firm plans to hire 200 people in coming years.

Canada’s Economy Battered Like A 3rd World Country By Forces Entirely Out Of Its Control

Ironically, in the now numerous accounts of how the current oil market came to collapse over the last few years and months, there are almost no references to Canada despite the importance of the oil economy to the nation. We have been mere bystanders in all of the complex series of events, and yet the impact of this will affect the Canadian economy for at least a decade.  Canada has bet its entire economy on natural resource exploitation only to have it battered as if it were a Third World country, dependent for its survival on one key commodity. How did Canada come to this sorry state of affairs?

 

How Crude Oil’s Global Collapse Unfolded

Tracing the Plunge In Oil Prices Back to Texas, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia…but not Canada

The sudden plunge in global crude oil prices from over $100 a barrel to under $65 has been portrayed as a showdown between Saudi Arabia and the U.S., but the reality is more complex.

Reblogged from the Wall Street Journal

By RUSSELL GOLD

Updated Dec. 12, 2014 6:33 p.m. ET

Since the 1970s, Nigeria has sent a steady stream of high-quality crude oil to North American refineries. As recently as 2010, tankers delivered a million barrels a day.

Then came the U.S. energy boom. By July of this year, oil imports from Nigeria had fallen to zero.

Displaced by surging U.S. oil production, millions of barrels of Nigerian crude now head to India, Indonesia and China. But Middle Eastern nations are trying to entice the same buyers. This has set up a battle for market share that could reshape the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and fundamentally change the global market for oil.

On Friday, crude prices dropped to their lowest level in five years after the International Energy Agencycut its forecast for global oil demand for the fifth time in six months. That signaled to investors that the world economy would struggle in the coming year, sending the Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbling by 315.51 points, or 1.8%, to 17280.83. That’s the Dow’s biggest weekly percentage loss in three years.

Since June, the IEA has cut its demand forecast for 2015 by 800,000 barrels, while it says U.S. oil output will rise next year by 1.3 million barrels a day.

The drop in global oil prices from over $110 a barrel to under $62 on Friday has been portrayed as a showdown between Saudi Arabia and the U.S., two of the world’s biggest oil producers. But the reality is more complex, involving Libyan rebels and Indonesian cabdrivers as well as Texas roughnecks and Middle Eastern oil ministers. It reflects both the surging supply of crude and the crumbling demand for oil.

And the oil-price plunge may not end soon. Bank of America Merrill Lynch says U.S. oil prices could drop to $50 in 2015.

The roots of the price collapse go back to 2008 near Cotulla, Texas, a tiny town between San Antonio and the Mexican border. This was where the first well was drilled into the Eagle Ford Shale. At the time, the U.S. pumped about 4.7 million barrels a day of crude oil.

In 2009 and 2010, the global economy improved, demand for oil increased and crude prices rose, creating a large incentive to find new supplies. In Cotulla and elsewhere, U.S. drillers answered the call. “There was, for lack of a better term, an arms race for oil, and we found a ton of oil,” says Dean Hazelcorn, an oil trader at Coquest in Dallas.

http://graphics.wsj.com/documents/iggy/?allowdecimals=1&clab=&countrycode=US&d=auto&dek=New+York+Mercantile+Exchange&dpre=&drad=radioALL&dsuf=&e_group=0&e_ic=1&e_nav=0&e_nb=0&e_nch=1&e_pch=1&echtadj=0&ed=&efut=0&etime=0&exchangeiso=XNYM&ezone=0&ftime=09%3A30&hed=Oil+futures&i=CRUDE+OIL+-+ELECTRONIC&idxs=none&instrumenttype=Future&nod=2&scom=0&sd=&size=g&src=Source%3A+WSJ+Market+Data+Group&ttime=16%3A30&ybot=&yl=&yld=Solid&yll=&ylxp=right&ytop=&zdir=%2B&zhrs=00&zlabel=&zmin=0&size=u16

Today, two hundred drilling rigs blanket South Texas, steering metal bits deep underground into the rock. Once drilled and hydraulically fractured, these wells yield large volumes ofhigh-quality oil; at the moment, the U.S. is producing 8.9 million barrels a day, thanks to the Eagle Ford and other new oil fields.

Americans aren’t pumping more gasoline or otherwise using up all that new crude, and under U.S. laws dating back to the 1970s, it has been almost impossible to export.

As a result, American refineries snapped up inexpensive crude from Texas and North Dakota, using it to replace oil from Nigeria, Algeria, Angola and Brazil, and almost every other oil-producing nation except Canada.

ENLARGE

OPEC sent the U.S. 180.6 million barrels in August 2008, a month before the first Eagle Ford well; in September 2014, it shipped about half that, 87 million barrels. That is about 100 fewer tankers of crude arriving in U.S. ports. They went elsewhere.

For a long time, it seemed like the world’s growing appetite for oil would soak up all the displaced crude. By 2011 prices began to hover between $90 and $100 a barrel and mostly stayed in that range.

But earlier this year, another trend began to come into focus, catching Wall Street energy analysts and other market watchers by surprise. In March, many analysts predicted global demand for crude oil would grow by 1.4 million barrels a day in 2014, to 92.7 million barrels a day.

That prediction proved wildly optimistic.

ENLARGE

MORE ON OIL PRICES

• Cheaper Oil Will Actually Hurt Factory Sector’s Growth, Manufacturers Say
• Today’s Markets: Oil Slides Further
• Cheap Gas Fuels Retail Hopes
• U.S. Drillers Near Choke Point
• Energy Journal: Bad to Worse
• Sign Up: Energy Journal Newsletter

Vikas Dwivedi, energy strategist with Macquarie Research, says a widespread deceleration of global economic growth sapped some demand. At the same time, several Asian currencies weakened against the U.S. dollar.

The cost of filling up a gas tank in Indonesia, Thailand, India and Malaysia rose, just as these countries were phasing out fuel subsidies. In Jakarta and Mumbai, drivers cut back.

“The fact that supply growth was strong shouldn’t have taken anybody by surprise,” Mr. Dwivedi says. But demand for oil “just fell off a cliff. And bear markets are fed by negative surprises.”

Rising supply and falling demand both put downward pressure on prices. Throughout the summer, however, fears of violence in Iraq kept oil prices high as traders worried Islamic State fighters could cut the countrys oil output.

Then two events tipped the market. In late June, The Wall Street Journal reported the U.S. government had given permission for the first exports of U.S. oil in a generation. While the ruling was limited in scope, the market saw it as the first crack in a long-standing ban on crude exports. Not only was the U.S. importing fewer barrels of oil, it could soon begin exporting some, too. This news jolted oil markets; prices began to edge down from their summer peaks.

On July 1, Libyan rebels agreed to open Es Sider and Ras Lanuf, two key oil-export terminals that had been closed for a year. Libyan oil sailed across the Mediterranean Sea into Europe. Already displaced from the U.S. Gulf Coast and eastern Canada, Nigerian oil was soon replaced in Europe, too. Increasingly, shipments of Nigerian crude headed toward China.

http://graphics.wsj.com/oil-producers-break-even-prices/?standalone=1

Oil prices began to decline. By the end of July, a barrel of U.S. crude fell below $100. In early September, the IEA, a Paris-based energy watchdog, noted there had been a “pronounced slowdown in demand growth.” A month later, oil prices fell below $90 a barrel.

By the middle of September, Petroleum Intelligence Weekly, a widely read industry newsletter, said both sides of the Atlantic Ocean were “awash in oil.” Nigeria, it declared, “needs to find new customers for its light, sweet crude streams in Asia.”

Saudi Arabia didn’t want Nigeria to develop long-term relationships with refinery buyers in Asia. In late September, the kingdom decided to shore up its hold on them by, effectively, holding a sale. The Saudis cut their official crude price in Asia by $1 a barrel; within a week, Iran and Kuwait did the same.

Two weeks later, the IEA again lowered its full-year projection of demand growth by 200,000 barrels a day to a meager annual increase of 700,000 barrels, nearly half of what it expected at the beginning of the year. Oil prices fell nearly $4 a barrel on the news.

At this point, the oil market appeared to be in free fall. Of the 23 trading days in October, the price of crude fell by more than $1 on eight days. It rose by $1 on one day. Traders’ attention turned to OPEC, which has traditionally played the role of market stabilizer by cutting production when prices fall and raising production when prices rise. Many OPEC members, reliant on the cash oil brings in to pay for generous social programs, didn’t want to cut.

Saudi Arabia’s powerful oil minister, Ali al-Naimi, was silent for weeks. The country had been burned in the past when it cut its oil output, only to see other countries continue to pump—and steal its customers.

And it was already feeling competition, says Abudi Zein, chief operating officer of ClipperData, a New York firm that tracks global crude movement. Colombia, which historically has sent most of its oil to the U.S., is finding its biggest buyer this year is China, a critical market for OPEC, he said.

“For the Saudis, Asia is their growth market,” Mr. Zein says. “The Nigerians and Colombians are being kicked out of their natural markets in North America. Saudi had to do something.”

At its regular meeting in Vienna in late November, the cartel kept production unchanged. U.S. and European oil prices fell another $7 per barrel.

On Wednesday, Mr. al-Naimi, the Saudi Arabian oil minister, was asked whether OPEC would soon act to cut exports. “Why should we cut production?” he asked. “Why?”

Canada’s “Natural Resource Curse” Will Wreak Economic Havoc For A Decade

Oil’s “new normal” will be global oil prices at or below $70 per barrel, say John Mauldin of equities.com, and many other analysts.  Western Canadian Select (WCS) closed at $55 per barrel this week. The impact on the Canadian economy will be ugly and prolonged. Fasten your seatbelts.

Suncor’s Fort McMurray Facility

Those following international events have probably already seen the stories on Putin’s Russia, and the combined impact international economic sanctions, and now, the unexpected and unwelcome plummet in World oil prices. The Russian economy in 2015 will likely see a budget deficit of $20 Billion or more as the ruble collapses and oil prices plummet. The problem is global and expected by analysts to persist for the foreseeable future. Lesser developed countries like Venezuela and Nigeria, which are more dependent on their oil economies, are expected to see even greater impacts.  Economists commonly refer to this as the “natural resource curse.”  Put simply, it means that national economies that elect to depend on their natural resources for economic prosperity, have consistently underperformed economies that emphasize greater economic diversity and prepare for the wild swings of commodity prices. A key missing element in these economies is a lack of investment in innovation which causes a deterioration of productivity.

Canada’s involvement in this same scenario is getting limited attention.  As the other major industrialized country with a “natural resource exploitation” based economy, fueled by the support of the current federal government which includes known climate change skeptics, Canada is running into the same buzz saw as Russia.  The Prime Minister is keen to put a brave face on all of this, which to many seems to have the feeling of “whistling in the graveyard.”  Last week, the government announced a program to allegedly fight the higher prices many Canadians pay for goods priced much more cheaply in the United States. Long a thorn in the side of Canadians, the move is seen as political arm waving with no teeth. The declining Canadian dollar and economic impact of our “natural resource curse” will make Harper’s plan to eliminate higher Canadian prices a sad joke on Canadians. The full impacts of these economic realities will be far wider: significant loss of jobs, chronic government budget deficits, a decline in industrial investment. Canada’s OECD productivity has fallen sharply behind the other industrialized countries. There will most certainly be a further decline in productivity due to Canada’s decades long failure to invest in innovation, preferring instead to offset poor productivity with windfall dollars from natural resource exploitation.

There is one industrialized nation that has recognized the reality of this Doomsday scenario: Norway. Norway has taken bold national action to protect the nation from the whipsaw impacts of the “natural resource curse.”  I have previously written about Norway’s plan to protect its economy, as has The Globe & Mail, while the Harper government prefers to do nothing.

READ MORE: Norway Confronts Its Natural Resource Curse