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.
The ethylene price recovery in the US, discussed in today's daily report, is again a function of supply disruptions against a backdrop of robust demand. The net effect is to keep ethylene prices well above costs, at margins that justify investment and it is interesting to see the quick return of the CP Chemical project to the front burner. We could make a case that another ethylene facility in the US is likely a bridge too far at this point, despite the compelling current economics. The deep dependence on the export markets makes the US model very vulnerable to cyclical oversupply, and the current tight market is completely obscuring this risk and lulling producers into what we believe will be a misled sense of security. It is likely that the plants already built will prove to be good investments, not least because of the opportunity profits they are making in their early years of operations, but you would need to have a very bullish longer-term view of oil prices relative to natural gas to invest further, as even with an aggressive on-shoring manufacturing program in the US, the net export nature of the polyethylene businesses in the US is unlikely to change much. New capacity means more ethane demand, against a backdrop of lower E&P investment, and while Chevron has access to equity ethane from its US E&P operations, which may guarantee supply, it does not guarantee the price. Separately, while we believe that recycling targets in the US and the rest of the Wold will disappoint, they will still eat into virgin polymer demand. More chemical recycling will mean more “recycled” polyethylene available from heavy crackers – not ethane-based crackers.