In our ESG and Climate report tomorrow, we are focusing on renewable materials and fuels, emphasizing counting carbon and the importance of verification and auditing. However, one of the side issues concerning renewables is their impact on food prices if they bid crops away from the food chain. The chart of the day from our daily chemical reactions report shows that corn prices are above their historical correlation with crude oil, but it also indicates a correlation and fuel markets can pay more for corn and other crop-based fuels when oil prices are high. The issue with exhibit below is that we already have inflated crop prices with minimal incremental demand for the fuel markets today. Prices are rising on strong global demand growth for food – supply chain issues that existed before the Ukraine crisis and – the supply challenges that are a direct consequence of the Ukraine crisis. This is before any significant investment in renewable fuels or materials. As governments implement policies to encourage renewable fuels – especially SAF – they need to consider what policies and incentives might be required in addition to price, encourage meaningful changes to the acres planted around the world, and help productivity where it is low.
We have talked at length in today's daily and recent Sunday recaps about our expectation for a mega-cycle in chemicals because of an unwillingness to deploy capital as uncertainty rises. The exception is likely to be large oil producers looking at long-term downstream integration plans, with the primary objective of consuming captive crude oil. The Aramco ambitions in China bear some similarities to the ExxonMobil investment announced for China last year. While the crude oil market may be tight and prices may be high today, few oil producers believe that demand will not ultimately be hurt by renewable penetration and EV and hydrogen growth as transport fuels. Looking for captive crude oil demand is a logical step for the major and it is likely that the Aramco ambitions include refining as well as chemicals in China.
Could what we are seeing in metals happen in chemicals and polymers? Over the last few weeks, we have seen already high metals pricing spike even further, both because of production shortfalls and because of expectation of higher demand, especially in the renewables space, as conventional energy prices have spiked. We show a lithium example below, but note that after chaotic nickel trading last week and a halt to trading, the market has made some attempts to reopen this morning with renewed problems.
It is interesting to note the rapid rise in US propylene (and benzene) values as they follow propane and crude prices (propane is following crude because of its heating value and export opportunities). Ethylene is not moving as US natural gas is in surplus and is not following international natural gas prices. The US is surplus ethylene and derivatives, but we would expect to see ethylene and ethylene derivative prices jump up in the US if Europe is physically unable to make ethylene and derivatives or if the costs in Europe become so high that supplying incremental volumes from the US becomes even more compelling. For more see today's report titled "Into The Mystic – Ex-US Energy Price Surge Favors US Producers; Low Visibility Keeps Capex In Check".
As the ratio of pricing between Brent crude and US natural gas rises, the US ethylene cost advantage is spiking, and as long as the US is producing enough natural gas to feed domestic demand and allow the LNG facilities to run at capacity, the advantage can remain. This gives the US a significant cost advantage and assuming that there is spare capacity the US industry can step up and support Europe if needed. However, it is not clear that there is much spare capacity, either in the production units or in the logistics to get the product to ports or across the Atlantic. There is a surplus of liquid and gas carriers today, but the container problems are global and the inflation and supply chain issues that we seem to be stuck with are likely to keep containers tied up in excess inventory that consumers will want to keep building as a cushion for a less certain supply outlook. The shipping issues are only part of the problem for Asia, as even with better opportunities to export, the region is seeing escalating production costs because of the movement in crude oil and naphtha pricing. We are in an unusual position where strong demand in the US is keeping domestic prices higher than in Asia, despite costs in the US that are low enough, especially for polyethylene to move material to Asia at costs well below the cost of manufacture in Asia. This dynamic can last for a lot longer in our view as long as oil prices remain elevated versus US natural gas. An abrupt turn will occur if US natural gas production falls below domestic demand and LNG demand – this would cause a spike in US natural gas prices. For more see today's daily report.
The upwards pressure on crude oil prices will likely drive propane prices much higher in the near term and this will significantly impact propane dehydrogenation (PDH) costs in the US and put further upward pressure on propylene prices and prices for propylene derivatives. Note in the exhibit below that US polymer prices are turning slightly more positive relative to Asia again. While some of this will be cost-based issues in the US, especially for polypropylene, higher freight rates (again) continue to make it difficult for producers in Asia to maintain attractive operating rates and make it harder to push prices higher to reflect what are now rapidly escalating costs. The oil moves today may result in more capacity closures in Asia, which should lead to better pricing, but as we noted in our Weekly on Monday (and likely more extreme today) outside of US ethane-based ethylene producers, no one is making money producing ethylene today. Prices are going higher.
We show the correlation between soy prices and crude oil in Exhibit 1 in today's daily report, but note all the higher prices in the Exhibit below for corn, soy, and canola. This is providing a good backdrop for the crop protection industry, as seen in Corteva’s numbers. Farmers can afford to spend more to improve yields. We expect this trend to continue as demand for food will continue to grow and we will see incremental demand for fuels and materials.
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 should probably link the message in the exhibit below with the write-ups in both today's daily report and today's ESG and Climate report. The drop in E&P spending relative to cash flows and the shortage signals that are evident from the current oil and natural gas prices is likely to bump into rising hydrocarbon demand for the next several years, while the rate of renewable investment tires to catch up with energy growth before it can focus on energy substitution as meaningfully as the climate agenda would like. We also cannot look at the chart below and say that it does not matter because oil is less important in energy transition than natural gas. The oil-based investments in the Permian and Eagleford plays, in particular, have significant volumes of associated gas, and much of the natural gas supply growth in the US has come from these oil-centric investments. As they slow down, natural gas supply and NGL supply will be impacted, and while we are seeing increased rig counts in the natural gas biased regions, such as the Marcellus, the potential declines from the other fields will be hard to make up for.
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.