Over the last
few weeks two key investors made critical announcements for long-term
investment in energy sources. Saudi
Aramco, the world’s largest oil producer, announced its intention to invest as
much as $5 billion in renewable energy as part of a plan to diversify outside
of the oil sector. Last month the China
Central Government announced the decision to cancel 104 coal-fired power plants
representing total 120 gigawatts of capacity across a dozen provinces. Instead China is planning to install 130
gigawatts of wind and solar power sources by 2020. Yet in the U.S. president, who as a candidate
for the country’s highest political office made expressed fierce statements of
support for U.S. coal producers, vowed to expand jobs in the coal industry by
scrapping the recently implemented Clean Power Plan. Trump was also quoted on the campaign trail
claiming “I know a lot about solar
- I love solar….Except there is a
problem with it. It’s got a lot of problems
with it. One problem is it’s so
expensive.”
The stark contrast in investment decision making style
and direction brings to mind a critical question. What happens to the competitive strength of a country that invests in an unsustainable
business like coal when its most significant economic rivals are moving forward
with new technologies?
In a cloud of coal dust…
During the 2016
presidential election campaign Donald Trump vowed to expand the U.S. coal
industry apparently to gain votes in those states where coal mines are located. The Clean Power Plan was an easy target. The Obama Administration had crafted the Clean Power Plan in 2015 and put it
into play beginning February 2016.
Although probably not a perfect plan, its provisions require states to
adopt standards that reduce emissions from power plants. Since coal-fired power plants are among the
largest emitters of carbon, they will be impacted the most by clean-up requirements. Investment decisions remain within the
utility company board rooms and hopefully will be based on the economics of
generating energy while meeting emissions standards. The standards transfer the cost of pollution
back to the emitters and their customers.
The Trump
administration wants to throw the Clean Energy Plan out in favor of a cozier
decision making process where coal gets a favored status regardless of clear proof that burning coal leads to health and environmental problems. Donald Trump’s
energy policies appear to favor a few partisans in select corners at the peril
of the rest of the energy industry. Trump
has shown scant willingness to gather facts and learn about recent program in the alternatives to energy from fossil fuels. Trump’s choices
for cabinet posts are mostly friends of the oil and gas industry with little
experience in the renewable energy sector.
The approach
involves no investment in new technology, no job-creating programs other than
the few that are associated with coal.
It also pushes the costs of pollution associated with coal-fired power
plants back onto those who pay medical bills or experience loss related to
environmental degradation. From
30,000-foot view it does not seem like a winning investment scenario.
On the other side of the world…
Beginning mid 2016, investment banks
were invited to Riyadh for the purpose of presenting acquisition targets
and deals to Saudi Aramco executives. Company representatives have already indicated
capital will be spread across a wide range from infrastructure projects in the
oil and gas industry, solar power production and wind energy. Even nuclear power is on the table. The investment agenda is intended to diversify
business risk for Saudi Aramco. The company
is planning an initial public offering sometime in late 2017 or early
2018. Plans are to list on both the
London and New York stock exchanges.
Public or
private, Saudi Aramco investment plants are in-line with Saudi Arabia energy
policy. In April 2016, Deputy Crown
Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced plans to produce 10 gigawatts of power
from renewable energy sources by 2023.
The kingdom also plans to develop a renewable energy research and
manufacturing industry.
Red Dragon cleans up…
Although the Saudi’s are driven by the need to diversify, the decision by China to go ‘green’ despite significant coal resources is driven primarily by the high cost of air pollution. Parts of northern and central China are beset by heavy smog during the winter months, delaying flights, stalling cargo operations are ports and closing schools. With over 21 million residents, Beijing has been a flash point for activists seeking China’s participation in the Paris Agreement to combat climate change.
The People’s
Republic of China ratified the Paris Agreement in September 2016. Just before the G20 meeting that month, China’s
president, Xi Jinping, made a joint announcement with U.S. President Barack
Obama, pledging China’s intentions to help reduce has emissions leading to
global warming. Separately, at a
gathering of the B20 taskforce, Xi Jinping described China’s intentions to
confront climate change by closing coal mines and steel mills.
Together China
and the U.S. account for about 38% of the greenhouse gas emissions that are
responsible for a deleterious warming of the planet. The economic consequences are enormous. After
years of foot-dragging, China finally appears ready to deal with climate
issues. The Red Dragon is brushing off
the coal dust and turning to renewable energy in a big way. Endorsement of solar and wind energy sources
means Chinese companies will have access to domestic capital for research and
development. China companies could even
be beneficiaries of Saudi Aramco investment.
Innovations of more efficient solar devices or higher power turbines, as
examples, could ultimately lead to more marketable products and a better
competitive position in the world energy market.
Peaks and valleys in U.S. policy….
The pinnacle of
policy making in the U.S. resides in the Oval Office. However, in the U.S. policy emanates from
more rooms than just the Oval Office.
Various state governments have made significant strides in crafting
cogent renewable energy plans. Those
policies make a difference. For example,
California adopted its first Renewable Energy Program in 1998, and has been
active in solar and wind investment ever since.
According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, investment in clean
technology companies in California has grown by six times over the last ten
years in part because of state policies. In August 2016, the California legislature
reaffirmed the state’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions to 40% of the
1990 levels by the year 2030. Renewable
energy companies can count on California to be a friendly market for the next
thirteen years.
Under the current
Trump administration a more relevant example of state sponsored investment in
renewable energy is the Texas program called CREZ -
Competitive Renewable Energy Zones.
Among the many natural resources
in Texas are strong steady breezes that make possible prolific wind power
generation. Getting electricity to all
residents of the big state of Texas requires an extensive distribution
system. Under the CREZ program $7
billion was invested in miles and miles of power lines. The program spurred unprecedented investment
in wind power that has brought the sector to about 20% of total generating
capacity in the state. On windy days the
wind power sources can provide as much as 40% of the electricity consumed in
Texas.
The CREZ program
is heralded as one of the most visionary infrastructure projects in Texas
history. It could also be one of the
most important developments in bringing about a flourishing wind energy
industry in the U.S. Who was in the
pinnacle of leadership in Texas when the CREZ program was put into place? None other than Rick Perry, Trump’s pick to
lead the Energy Department. The CREZ
program in Texas was established under Perry’s watch as Texas governor from
2000 to 2015.
Job creation…
It will be
interesting to watch Perry work with Trump if he is confirmed as Energy Czar. Will
Perry remember his unique and compelling investment experience in Texas? Will he take note of the investment decisions
made by rivals of the U.S. or will energy policy simply be a tool to promote
Trump’s political popularity? Investors
will have a chance to watch and observe.
If the Trump administration fails to foster viable and sustainable
investments in energy in the U.S. there are always options for investors. Perhaps
by 2018, there will be a chance to invest in a leading renewable energy
company - Saudi Aramco. In that offering, there will be jobs created, new technologies developed and new businesses launched - just not in the U.S.
Neither the author of the Small Cap Strategist web
log, Crystal Equity Research nor its affiliates have a beneficial interest in
the companies mentioned herein.
No comments:
Post a Comment