The linked headline is interesting and accurate, but the “civilian” education around plastics has just begun – and will need to be continuing education. Plus, the agenda for plastics producers likely changed with COP26. On the first point, while consumers have been made more aware of plastic waste issues and recycling in 2021, it is still very mixed by geography, with some countries and some US states making major pushes in 2021 while others have lagged. There remains a significant level of skepticism and disinterest in recycling in the US as we discussed in a recent ESG and Climate report – linked here (See chart below). The continuing education comment is based on the likely significant evolution of plastics over the next ten years. If we introduce more biodegradable polymers into the mix, these will have to be dealt with differently by consumers. Also, as packagers move towards more “recyclable” packaging, more materials will move from a waste stream to a chemically recyclable stream and ultimately to a mechanically recyclable stream – as this evolves, consumers will need constant updates is they are expected to play a part.
Following on from the Enterprise comments covered in our daily report, the company is more likely to acquire something in chemicals than build it in our view, especially if a move into ethylene or polymers is on the table. Today, building capacity will come with all sorts of emission-related restrictions most likely, and many of the new build announcements we have seen since COP26 have come with a carbon plan (Dow, Air Product, and Borouge). While it is not obvious today that any Gulf Coast ethylene capacity is up for sale, we would imagine that most companies are reviewing strategy and evaluating whether they have assets of entire businesses that may have a better owner. This would be especially true if a basic chemical business is holding back the valuation of a more interesting core. In the recent past, we have talked about the relative value arbitrage open to LyondellBasell from separating its compounding, licensing, and recycling business from the core. Maybe the core would fit well with Enterprise? As the chart below shows, there is money in buying ethylene for export, but there is more money in the US in making ethylene, as discussed in our daily report.
The CP Chem propylene splitter announcement linked suggests that CP Chem expects surplus refinery propylene to be around for the long-term, and likely has supply lined up from the parent companies. However, this is still a bit of a gamble unless both parents see a scenario where they would change catalysts on FCC units longer-term and run at higher severity for more propylene and more hydrogen. This project looked a lot better only a few weeks ago than it does today – based on the spread in the Exhibit below, but propylene demand continues to grow faster than ethylene demand in the US and with all incremental ethylene capacity based on ethane, propylene consumers either have to choose the path from refineries or invest in on purpose PDH. PDH is an energy-intensive process with a large carbon footprint, and splitting refinery propylene likely looks far less problematic from an emissions perspective, especially if there is surplus process heat on-site. In our ESG report today we talk about polymer recycling into new end markets, but polypropylene may see more direct substitution, especially if we see consumables related polypropylene recycled into durable polypropylene markets. This might dent demand growth for polypropylene going forward, but probably not meaningfully.
Following on from the LyondellBasell commentary in today's daily report, we would make one further, but very important point. With its refinery (granted the company is exploring opportunities to exit) and its huge commodity polyethylene, polypropylene, and propylene oxide business, any attempt to pursue a “specialty” strategy that encompasses the whole portfolio will be seen (crudely) as trying to put some lipstick on a pig! This rarely works in the chemical sector and the real transformation stories involve wholesale portfolio shifts, many of which have taken notable periods of time to develop. We still believe that the right path for LyondellBasell is to spin off the good piece – recycling, licensing, and compounding, or even better, find someone they can sell the business to through a Reverse Morris Trust. This strategy would likely allow the company to pay down (or shift) a significant amount of debt. The commodity business can then focus on the best strategy for a commodity polymer business in the face of energy transition, which might involve taking the business private or merging with another.
The ACC forecasts below leave us a little confused as the implication for specialty chemicals is that production declines in the US by an average of 2.0% per annum from 2019 to 2023. Given the demand that we are seeing for US manufacturing, as covered in our most recent Sunday Report, we would expect demand for all inputs to rise and it is unlikely that the gap would be filled by a swing in net imports. The lower demand from the Auto industry in 2020 and 2021 and broader manufacturing shutdowns in 2020 explains the 2020 and 2021 numbers to a degree, but it is not clear why there would not be a rebound as auto rates increase. We would also expect to see a stronger rebound in polymer production in 2022, assuming weather events are less impactful than in 2021, given substantial new capacity for polyethylene from ExxonMobil/SABIC, BayStar, and Shell.
Our latest Sunday Thematic research report titled, "Reshoring Should Remain Supportive of Chemicals in ’22" studied the investment in US enterprise zones, near and medium-term, and the broad-based benefits for domestic supply chains.
The decline in US and global chemical pricing this week (as discussed in today's daily) is a function of oversupply in the US and lower costs in the rest of the world. The US has had an incentive to produce everything for most of the year and has had essentially full capacity to do so since the beginning of the 4th quarter. This will have collided with seasonally weaker incremental demand in December and the recent abrupt drop in oil and gas prices to swing momentum very much in favor of buyers. Polymer prices have to date been more stubborn in the US, but we expect continued weakness here also through the end of the year.
The recent Dow guidance is worth some further comment as it is being heralded in the stock market as an earnings miss, or at least that is what is implied in the stock performance, even though the signals around margin squeezes in 4Q have been in place for weeks and have been covered extensively in our work. Some elements of modeling chemical company earnings are complex, but rising energy (and therefore feedstock) prices is not one of them. We have commented several times over the last couple of years about the lack of almost any effort being made by the sell-side to rethink estimates mid-quarter, choosing instead to take or interpret company guidance (generally in the first month of a quarter) and then wait until earnings are reported. This does a disservice to both the institutional investors and the chemical companies, as the investors quickly conclude that estimates are likely too high – simply looking broadly at what sectors get hurt by rising energy – but generally do not have a good measure of by how much earnings will be impacted, so they sit on the sidelines, expecting the surprise. That said, there are so many algorithms working today that the alternative of gradual negative revisions to a more reasonable target for the quarter is also likely to hurt stock performance.
The drop in US benzene pricing is likely a function of lower crude oil pricing and the overall impact this is having on oil product values. As the US has moved to much lighter ethylene feedstocks, the proportion of benzene that is coming from refining is overwhelming and alternative values for benzene or reformate in the gasoline pool are a strong driver of US and international pricing. Lower naphtha pricing for ethylene units outside the US will also hurt benzene values. By contrast, the stronger natural gas market – through the end of last week - supported ethane pricing in the US and we saw a step up in propane pricing – which have provided support for ethylene and propylene – also note that the analysis we published yesterday in the weekly catalyst suggests that the US can export ethylene to Asia at current prices – delivering ethylene into the region below current local costs. This should keep a floor under US ethylene pricing although any further decline in crude oil prices relative to US natural gas and NGLs will close this arbitrage.
We remain concerned that natural gas E&P investment in the US remains too low to meet expected demand increases, especially for natural gas-fired power stations and LNG, but also possibly for NGLs, especially ethane, given new ethylene capacity and a fresh export market in Mexico. Near-term, natural gas prices are showing some easing relative to crude, albeit a very volatile trend – Exhibit below – but we see medium and longer-term shortages unless E&P spending increases. The new power facilities shown in the bottom Exhibit will all need incremental natural gas, and the international LNG market is so tight that as new capacity comes online in the US we would expect it to run as hard as is possible. This sets up for a market where the clearing price of natural gas in the US is at risk of being set by the marginal exporter. The price jump for domestic consumers would be dramatic and it would cause all sorts of headaches in Washington and probably intervention. We showed the incremental natural gas price in the Netherlands in our Daily Report on November 18th, and if the US price were to reflect the netback from this level, they would rise close to $30 per MMBTU. The natural gas industry needs some sort of global blessing to continue to operate as what will likely be the core transition fuel. It will be necessary to clean up the emissions footprint of natural gas, but the industry should be encouraged to invest on this basis. For those who doubt whether the US natural gas price can rise to $30/MMBTU – note that the Europeans did not think $30 was possible either.