US rail data for chemicals remain at the 5-year highs and have been there for almost 2 months. This is working its way into the supply chain and we are seeing weakness in US polymer prices across the board, except for PVC. US spot polymer prices are in a bit of a “no man's land” right now as they would need to drop significantly to find incremental demand offshore, given US premiums to the rest of the world. We believe that most of the volume leaving the US is doing so within company-specific businesses – ExxonMobil supplying ExxonMobil customers, Dow supplying Dow customers, etc, and consequently, these shipments do not show up in the spot market.
Focusing on a theme from our daily report today and our ESG report yesterday, the cost pressures in Europe are very real, and the more the power or natural gas component to your costs the more the pain and the more important it will be to raise prices. The industry and consumers, in general, have not had to deal with significant inflation for decades and it is very easy for customers to push back with a “this is transitory” argument, especially when many governments are telling that story. The supply chain is to blame to a degree, but it is largely a symptom of the underlying cause, which is that demand has outstripped supply. It is easy and more palatable to try and brush it off as temporary, but if the energy price issues persist in Europe and China and companies are not successful in passing on prices they will, at some point, choose not to operate. Alternatively, if power shortages are enough to cause interruptions, industrial users may have no choice but to close down. All this will impact product availability and buyers pushing back on price increases could find themselves without supply which is generally worse than paying more. The European packaging industry is right to raise the flag around higher prices, but their customers will pay the increases needed to ensure that they can keep operating, even if the discussions are more challenging than they have needed to be for the last 30 years.
The linked article looks at the chemical inflationary cycle of the 70s, which has some relevant indicators for what we are seeing today, but there were also some stark differences. Rising raw material prices is a common theme and while it is convenient to blame OPEC+ this time, the group is not nearly as much to blame today as it was in the 70s. Consumers were facing not just higher oil prices, but also genuine shortages because of the OPEC cutbacks and the multi-year lead times that it took non-OPEC producers to ramp up E&P and ultimately production. This time the oil is there and relatively easy to get to, especially in the US, but the capital spending decisions of the US oil producers – mostly because of ESG related pressure – are holding back the production.
In an important, but inevitable, change in tone, it is worth noting that the Borouge ethylene expansion announcement includes the idea that the complex will explore the possibility of a major carbon capture facility that will take much of the CO2 from the existing complex as well as the new plant. We have stated previously that the mood has changed sufficiently such that large industrial investments without a carbon abatement plan will not get approval from stakeholders and this is a prime example of what we expect. Locations with low-cost CCS will see disproportionate investment in our view and Abu Dhabi already has CCS in place as Adnoc is selling blue ammonia already to Japan. As we noted in a recent Sunday Piece, we expect carbon abatement challenges to slow expansions in basic chemicals and, despite this announcement by Borealis, see a market shortage in 2024/25 as a consequence.
In the first Exhibit below we show a 5-year high in chemical rail-car movements. We have noted in research since early October that 4Q production in the US could be very high because of a combination of available capacity – following a year of weather-related delays – and very attractive margins and demand. We have been at the high end of rail car volumes for most of the quarter, and this may be part of the reason why we are seeing some price weakness for polymers in the US. Most of the polyethylene exported from the US moves from the manufacturing site to the export port via rail, so increased exports would also drive higher rail car numbers. As long as pricing and margins remain high and customer demand robust, we would expect these higher volumes to continue. This does not make us any less concerned that somewhere in the chain there is now an inventory build going on and that fortunes could reverse in 2022.
Clearly, as a direct consequence of our shortage theme this week, ExxonMobil announces a large new complex in China is through FID. This may be the company rushing something ahead before tighter restrictions are imposed or it may be an indication that with a 2060 net-zero pledge China is going to let things slide for a while. We would not be surprised to see ExxonMobil face some bad PR around this project if there is not some emission abatement plan with it. The facility will give ExxonMobil some further integration – effectively consuming equity hydrocarbons – but, if the company is setting itself up for criticism for investing in jurisdictions with lower emissions standards, this could backfire. It is also a very counter-cyclical investment given the poor profitability seen in the region right now (chart below) and as we discussed in our Sunday Piece - Waiting For The Big One – Is A Chemical Mega-Cycle Ahead?.
While we are beginning to see some easing in US polyolefin prices we note in today's daily that prices are not falling in step with monomers and so spreads are widening. Because of the very integrated nature of the polyethylene market, we see swings in where the margin is being captured based on relative tightness and today it is squarely biased towards polyethylene in the US. Despite the polymer price declines in the US we maintain a level of pricing that is well above Asia – Exhibit below, but not high enough to attract imports, given the high container rates and the long lead times on shipping. The same is not true for polypropylene, which maintains a spread versus Asia that can cover the very high current costs of transport (bottom exhibit).
We are not surprised by some of the DuPont stories this morning. We had predicted a long time ago that Mr. Breen was far from done on the restructuring of the company and that COVID might have caused a delay in some of the plans but not changed them. Mr. Breen did a very value-enhancing job of taking Tyco from a slightly out of control, then GE wannabe, to a group of focused companies, separated from the whole. What he has panned for DuPont comes from the same playbook in our view. The divestments and acquisitions announced today will create a core at DuPont – focused on electronics, water, protection, industrial technologies, and “next generation” automotive. Given some of the recent industry moves, we would expect significant interest in the engineering polymers and other resins platforms. After these moves are complete, while not yet obvious from a valuation perspective, we could see a further split, carving out an ESG friendly piece focused around water and protection, although the moves announced today may be enough to get the company an earnings multiple boost.
Shipping rates are falling steeply but we are not out of the logistic woods yet with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach proposing very punitive charges for containers that are not collected quickly enough. The initiative is intended to decrease bottlenecks at the ports by clearing the docksides more quickly, but the reason why there are delays is often out of the shippers' and buyers’ hands as it is a lack of truck drivers and rail capacity that is at issue. The penalty rates proposed are steep and might discourage some shipments – especially of polymers and other low-value products. If it takes you an extra 20 days to offload a container from the port the cost of shipping polymers from Asia would double – very few importers would take that risk given the small margin opportunity that exists in the trade already. The penalties might encourage trucking companies to increase driver compensation to attract more drivers, but only if they can pass the potential penalty through to their customers. While this move proposed for containers may help drive down some of the port congestion times it is not a good sign for inflation as someone will have to pay – either pay the fines or pay up to improve resources to clear the containers more quickly.
We are seeing some stability in ethylene and propylene pricing in the US to start the week, and with the steady rise in crude prices and the Monday jump in natural gas prices, this is not surprising. As we noted in yesterday’s Weekly Catalyst, there is enough incentive to export ethylene from the US to Asia – most likely Southeast Asia rather than North Asia, and this could offer support for those with surplus ethylene in the US today.