Finally! It’s the last day of 2021, which means it’s time for our annual Top 10 Energy Prognostications blog, the long-standing RBN tradition where we look into our crystal ball to see what the upcoming year has in store for energy markets. And unlike many forecasters, we also look into the rear-view mirror to see how we did with last year’s predictions. That’s right! We actually check our work! And that’s what we’ll do in today’s scorecard blog. Then on Monday we’ll lay out what we see as the most important developments of the year ahead. But today it’s time to look back. Back to what we posted on January 2, 2021.
Ya know, this prognostications business is getting out of hand. Who would have predicted the spot price of natural gas in Oklahoma soaring to $1,200/MMBtu for a single day in February? Or COVID coming back. And back. And back. And how about propane prices, flying to the moon and then crashing to earth, all before winter even starts? Not to mention crude prices up while demand is down, and energy companies in a mad dash to make investments in anything that demonstrates a commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But given these wacky markets, we still did OK with our 2021 predictions, even when the market action was not exactly what we saw coming.
So here’s our 2021 Prognostications report card. Like all good New Year’s Top 10 lists, we’ll start at #10 and work our way down to #1.
Comments
I think you are not adequately accounting for the implicit risk premium the industry faces from the Biden administration. There's a reason why activity is less, per dollar, than under Obama or Trump.
https://twitter.com/RobertClarke_WM/status/1453017667137323010
And no, we didn't get fiscal religion. And no, we didn't run out of resource. 2018 (after 2014) should have shown that. Investors just don't want to fund expansion of buggywhip plants. And Brandon and Jennifer G. have been pretty harsh towards US O&G. It's not just the immediate actions but what they signal long term in risk.
Also, some of your discussion doesn't take this into account. IOW the crude price versus natty price thesis is correct in that lower oil activity drives less ass gas and thus higher natty prices. It's just that the Brandon administration has caused about a $20 risk premium for capex (see chart above), versus previously. (Yes there is also some risk premium for direct gas drilling.)
In terms of LNG, it's not really correct to think that our prices are coupled to offshore. There's a bottleneck in terms of liquefaction. So TTF and JKM could go to $200 and there would be no additional impact on HH. It's very analagous to a basis diff blowing out, with a full pipeline.