PPCC-Pisitófilos Creditófagos-Verano 2022

[Derby]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-02/uk-slips-behind-india-to-become-world-s-sixth-biggest-economy

UK Slips Behind India to Become World’s Sixth Biggest Economy

*Loss of status comes as ruling Tory party elects new premier
*Cost of living shock batters UK, while Indian economy surges

Britain has dropped behind India to become the world’s sixth largest economy, delivering a further blow to the government in London as it grapples with a brutal cost-of-living shock.

The former British colony leaped past the UK in the final three months of 2021 to become the fifth-biggest economy. The calculation is based in US dollars, and India extended its lead in the first quarter, according to GDP figures from the International Monetary Fund.(...)

[Derby]

Rusia se vuelca hacia China e India para vender el gas y el crudo que deja de exportar a la UE
https://atalayar.com/content/rusia-se-vuelca-hacia-china-e-india-para-vender-el-gas-y-el-crudo-que-deja-de-exportar-la

Ante está perdida de mercados hacia Occidente, Moscú se vuelca hacia China e India. A estos países multiplica la venta de hidrocarburos, más de gas natural, si bien a precios más reducidos de los que recibe de Europa excepto de Serbia, con la que ha firmado esta semana un acuerdo muy beneficioso para Belgrado. Si bien, este pacto es casi una anécdota por el tamaño del comprador, la cuestión relevante es la exportación a los dos grandes países asiáticos.

Artículo fechado el pasado 31/8:

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/China-Is-Quietly-Reselling-Its-Excess-Russian-LNG-To-Europe.html

China Is Quietly Reselling Its Excess Russian LNG To Europe

(...) China’s JOVO Group, a big LNG trader, recently disclosed that it had resold an LNG cargo to a European buyer.

A futures trader in Shanghai told Nikkei that the profit made from such a transaction could be in the tens of millions of dollars or even reach $100mn.

China’s biggest oil refiner Sinopec Group also acknowledged on an earnings call in April that it has been channelling excess LNG into the international market.

Local media have said that Sinopec alone has sold 45 cargoes of LNG, or about 3.15mn tonnes. The total amount of Chinese LNG that has been resold is probably more than 4mn tonnes, equivalent to 7 per cent of Europe’s gas imports in the half year to the end of June.

Make no mistake: all of this "excess" LNG was soured in part or in whole in Russia, but since it has been "tolled" in China, it is no longer Russian. It is instead - drumroll - Chinese LNG.

The good news is that the 53 million tonnes that the bloc purchased surpasses imports by China and Japan and has brought Europe’s gas-storage occupancy rate up to 77%.If this continues, Europe is likely to reach its stated goal of filling 80% of its gas storage facilities by November (at which point it will start draining the reserves at a breakneck pace to keep warm during the winter). But while China’s economic slump has brought much-needed relief to Europe, it comes with a major footnote. As soon as economic activity bounces back in China, the situation will quickly reverse, and Beijing will no longer re-export Russia LNG to keep Europe warm.

Hilariously, it also means that instead of being dependent on Russia for gas, Europe is now becoming dependent on Beijing instead for its energy - which is still Russian gas, only this time imported from China - which makes a mockery of US geopolitical ambitions to defend a liberal international order with its own energy exports.

Worse, while Europe could buy Russian LNG for price X, it instead has to pay 2X, 3X or more, just to virtue signal to the world that it won't fund Putin's regime, when in reality is is paying extra to both Xi and to Putin, who is collecting a premium price thanks to the overall market scarcity.

Without expressly stating it, the FT does imply that Europe is buying Russian LNG by way of China:

If Russia ends up exporting more gas to China as a means to punish Europe, China will have more capacity to resell its surplus gas to the spot market — indirectly helping Europe.

By Zerohedge.com

[pollo]

Vosotros...

... podéis poner el culo en pompa en dirección a la nueva Jerussalen moscovita.




Los demás...

... partirnos de la risa.

No debemos someternos a nadie. Pero nadie es nadie, los anglomierdas incluidos. Lo que no puede hacerse es quemar el tren para propulsarlo, que es lo que estamos haciendo. Nos están arrastrando a la ruina por intereses que no son nuestros. Nos están sacrificando com un peón.

Me creería un 0,1% de la indignacion que muchos decís que tenéis si no fuera que sois muy selectivos con las guerras que os indignan. No cuela. Mientras tanto, estamos poniendo el culo a Arabia Saudí, y ni palabra de Yemen.

Que por cierto a mí me importa tres cojones, dicho sea de paso, pero para mí es lo mismo que esto. Desde un punto de vista egoísta, estamos haciendo el gilipollas geopolítico. Y vosotros lo celebráis (pero no veo a nadie irse al frente).

Ya sé hasta cuándo durará la indignación, que será exactamente hasta que os toquen la cartera (que ocurrirá, salvo que no viváis aquí, lo cual explicaría algunas cosas), momento en el que cargaréis contra todo excepto contra las decisiones estúpidas e irreversibles que se están tomando ahora.

[pollo]

Con lo oficialista gubernamental que me ha salido,  me choca que me ejemplifique el giro asiático hacia las nucelares.
Aquí ya mismo estamos construyendo 10 reactores para no tener que depender de putin el malfado ( pronunciado como j.m.ruiz mateos).


Sds.

Ya, ya...

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energ%C3%ADa_nuclear_en_Espa%C3%B1a#Instalaciones_nucleares



Va a ser que no.

Demasiado a menudo me deja vd in albis sudden.
No sé si está siendo sarcástico o cree que yo no lo he sido o qué.
Hay 7 centrales con 10 reactores.
Hay moratoria aprobada por el psoe y no hay intención de contribuir nada más.
Entonces? Que es lo que va a ser que no?

Los asiáticos construyendo nucleares. Los franceses también.  Los alemanes se lonestan planteando
Nosotros NO.

Así pues, hacen bien los asiáticos? O no?  Es que no le sigo, de veras.


Sds.

Los asiáticos ya estaban en ello. No me parece que hayan cambiado nada de los planes que ya tenían de antes.

[sudden and sharp]

[...] Los asiáticos construyendo nucleares. Los franceses también.  Los alemanes se lonestan planteando
Nosotros NO.

Así pues, hacen bien los asiáticos? O no?  Es que no le sigo, de veras.


Sds.

Sí.

Nosotros tenemos alternativas.

[sudden and sharp]

Vosotros...

... podéis poner el culo en pompa en dirección a la nueva Jerussalen moscovita.




Los demás...

... partirnos de la risa.

No debemos someternos a nadie. Pero nadie es nadie, los anglomierdas incluidos. Lo que no puede hacerse es quemar el tren para propulsarlo, que es lo que estamos haciendo. Nos están arrastrando a la ruina por intereses que no son nuestros. Nos están sacrificando com un peón.

Me creería un 0,1% de la indignacion que muchos decís que tenéis si no fuera que sois muy selectivos con las guerras que os indignan. No cuela. Mientras tanto, estamos poniendo el culo a Arabia Saudí, y ni palabra de Yemen.

Que por cierto a mí me importa tres cojones, dicho sea de paso, pero para mí es lo mismo que esto. Desde un punto de vista egoísta, estamos haciendo el gilipollas geopolítico. Y vosotros lo celebráis (pero no veo a nadie irse al frente).

Ya sé hasta cuándo durará la indignación, que será exactamente hasta que os toquen la cartera (que ocurrirá, salvo que no viváis aquí, lo cual explicaría algunas cosas), momento en el que cargaréis contra todo excepto contra las decisiones estúpidas e irreversibles que se están tomando ahora.

No soy un experto en Yemen. ¿Guerra religiosa? ¿Iran?

Ilústranos si sabes.

Pero ojo, ahí los ricos son Oman y Yemen, la Arabia Felix. La sausi es un desierto. (Están logrando regadíos, no obstante.)

[senslev]

[AbiertoPorDemolicion]

Con lo oficialista gubernamental que me ha salido,  me choca que me ejemplifique el giro asiático hacia las nucelares.
Aquí ya mismo estamos construyendo 10 reactores para no tener que depender de putin el malfado ( pronunciado como j.m.ruiz mateos).


Sds.

Ya, ya...

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energ%C3%ADa_nuclear_en_Espa%C3%B1a#Instalaciones_nucleares



Va a ser que no.

Este tema de la energía nuclear es un buen ejemplo de como desde los medios de (des)información se mixtifica a calzón quitado, sin importarles quedar mal porque saben que nadie les va a señalar. Aunque siempre te queda la duda de si lo hacen por maldad o por ignorancia. A lo mejor es tan simple de que nunca jamás van a decir algo de ningun tema que pueda ser util para que el ciudadano se forme una opinión coherente y de utilidad.

Voy a escribir rápido y mal porque este tema no es la temática del foro y además no tengo ganas de perder mucho tiempo con esto.   

Las centrales nucleares que se van a cerrar, que son ocho, está previsto que se hagan en un calendario de ocho años, que va a comenzar dentro de cinco años; en 2027 se cierra el primer reactor nuclear, y se terminará en 2035. Para entonces, ya se verá si es conveniente cerrarlas o no. Desde luego, ese calendario no va a tener ninguna influencia en la escasez actual ni en los precios de ahora.

De aquí a 2027, hay previsiones de que nuestro potencial de generar energia renovable por medio de plantas fotovoltaicas y eólicas, será muy superior al que tenemos en la actualidad.

Lo de construir centrales nucleares para solucionar el problema actual de energia, tampoco es viable, y los mixtificadores lo saben. Para construir un central nuclear,  desde que se decide hasta que se conecta finalmente a la red electrica pasan entre 15 o 20 años. Alguien dirá que en China, este periodo es de siete años minimo, pero la legislación y los filtros son otros que en España y Occidente, por lo que no nos podemos comparar. En cualquier caso, hay que atenerse a la legisalación y al sistema de licencias que rige en nuestro ámbito.

Esto va a ser una carrera entre las renovables y la nuclear. ¿Para 2030 tendremos un parque de instalaciones fotovoltaicas y eólicas - y las que vayan surgiendo - suficiente para prescindir de la nuclear? Ese es el tema.

Acortar/alargar el plazo de desmantelamiento es una decisión política: sería invertir los recursos necesarios para que las centrales nucleares alargaran el plazo ¿es rentable, económico, necesario? ¿merece la pena meter dinero en las centrales nucleares para alargar su vida más allá de 2032?

La energía nuclear, sin tener en cuenta los costes económicos sumergidos que tiene, y que no llegan a la factura de la luz que pagamos los simples mortales, pero que los pagamos por otro lado desde los fondos públicos, tienen unos riesgos ya demostrados que todos sabemos. Hay un montón de eventos externos (naturales/guerras) a la central nuclear que pueden producir desastres de magnitudes que ni nos podemos imaginar. Me remito a todo lo que ya conocemos para reflexionar del tema. Pero es evidente que una central nuclear tiene más riesgos para la vida de las personas que cualquier instalación fotovoltaica o eólica.

Y por último, algo que saben los mixtificadores de la energia nuclear: el cierre de las centrales nucleares y su calendario está acordado entre gobiernos y empresas (no es tan imposición de los gobiernos como dicen) porque las empresas no quieren seguir operando esos reactores porque no les son rentables; o dicho de otra forma, los recursos que tienen metidos en las nucleares los pueden destinar a otras fuentes de energía que les darían más rentabilidad. Porque las eléctricas venden electricidad; no venden átomos, fotones solares o Km/h de viento.

Y para terminar, es totalmente falso que el calendario de cierre de centrales nucleares tenga alguna influencia en los precios actuales de la electricidad.

Y aquí lo dejo. Hay un montón de literatura sobre las virtudes, costes y riesgos de la energía nuclear. Pero el que se quiera enterar de este tema siguiendo los titulares de la prensa, va listo. Y ojito: hay un lobby bastante poderoso entorno a la Energia Nuclear que no se de donde sale o quien está detrás, pero que es más que evidente en muchas noticias y "opiniones" que se leen en la prensa.

[R.G.C.I.M.]

Fuente fiable?

[sudden and sharp]

La misma fiabilidad que el INE.* (La que le quieras dar.)







Edit: Hoy, en el ECI de Castellana, te financiaban joyas en la zona noble con una horquilla 0,26-6,0%. Has leído bien, joyas desde el 0,26% (Lo pongo de memoria, ojo.)

[senslev]

Al final da lo mismo porque según cada sesgo cognitivo harás caso a unas fuentes y no a otras. El INE no es fiable, tampoco lo son los bancos centrales, al final nada es fiable. Y si buscamos en las estadísticas oficiales de estos países, pues tampoco son fiables, como la no-inflación transitoria o inflación rara transitoria o la palabra de los burócratas de la Fed o el ECB, que parece que es ahora cuando han descubierto que no saben muy bien cómo funciona la inflación.

Lo cierto es que habría que hablar con ciudadanos ingleses y rusos para saber la realidad, pero seguro que tampoco serían fuentes fiables, igual los "compro oro" de Gran Vía lo son más.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19698308/russia-uk-prices-sanctions-food/amp/

Fuente fiable?

[cujo]

Defender la nuclear como fuente de energía es como defender el ladrillo como fuente de riqueza.
Sólo lo defienden los ignorantes o los q se benefician de ello.

[Derby]

https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2022/09/sydneys-house-price-crash-deepens/

Sydney’s house price crash deepens

Sydney’s nascent house price crash has hit a new milestone, according to the CoreLogic daily dwelling values index.

The quarterly rate of decline accelerated to 6.1% on 4 September – the fastest fall this cycle and the worst result since March 1983:


Sydney quarterly dwelling values are falling at their sharpest pace since 1983.

Sydney’s peak-to-trough decline has now hit 7.6%, with 7.0% of that fall occurring after the Reserve Bank of Australia’s (RBA) initial interest rate hike in early May:


Sydney dwelling values have fallen sharply in response to rising interest rate.

The next chart uses month-end CoreLogic data to measure Sydney’s current housing correction (shown in black) against prior episodes:


Sydney’s current correction the second steepest on record.

Sydney’s current correction has a long way to go before it reaches the depths of the 1982-83 bust (-17.4% over eleven months) or the 2017-19 correction (-14.9% over 23 months). However, the current rate of decline is the second fastest on record at this stage of the downturn (seven months in), with the pace of decline also accelerating sharply over the past quarter (as shown in the first chart above).

Ultimately, how far Sydney house prices fall will depend on how aggressively the RBA hikes interest rates, given higher mortgage rates lower borrowing capacity and reduce housing demand. Sydney has the nation’s most expensive houses with the most indebted households. Therefore, it is most sensitive to rate hikes.

Economists and the bond market expect the RBA to lift the official cash rate another 0.5% today to 2.35%, marking the fifth consecutive rise. Thus, we should expect house prices to continue falling in response.

The bottom won’t arrive until after the RBA stops increasing rates, whenever that is.

[Derby]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-06/china-s-energy-giants-sell-gas-to-world-scrambling-for-supply

China’s Energy Giants Sell Gas to World Scrambling for Supply

*Cnooc follows Sinopec and PetroChina with offers outside China
*Lithium prices near record amid tight supply worldwide

China’s biggest energy groups are diverting more liquefied natural gas away from their languishing home market, offering some relief to desperate buyers suffering supply shortages in other parts of the world.

Cnooc is offering to sell an LNG cargo for November loading from the North West Shelf export project in Australia, according to traders with knowledge of the matter. That comes after other major shippers, including Sinopec and PetroChina Co., sold several LNG shipments from US projects to energy-starved Europe throughout the year, traders said.

The supplies should provide modest respite for natural gas markets rocked by Russia halting a key pipeline to European customers. Natural gas prices in Europe and Asia are trading at an all-time high for this time of year, forcing governments to consider unprecedented steps to protect businesses and consumers.

China was the world’s top LNG buyer in 2021, but the nation’s strict Covid Zero policies and economic slowdown mean demand has slumped more than 20% this year. The divergence between China and the rest of the world means global buyers are willing to pay much higher rates.(...)

[Derby]

https://www.ft.com/content/3a188669-7eeb-4154-91a8-f808ed8ced71

Why are Europe’s power producers running out of cash?

Despite selling electricity at record prices, the industry is sliding into a liquidity crisis

(...)Why are electricity generators short of cash?

Electricity generators use futures markets to help guarantee the price they will receive. The markets are crucial to managing the provision of power and electricity to millions of homes.

The companies like to de-risk their power sales to households and businesses by taking short positions in futures markets before selling the physical electricity. That way if power prices fall, any losses on the contract will be mitigated by gains from the short position, and if prices rise the additional profit made on the physical delivery should cover the cost of the short.

Under current market rules, anyone taking a short position in futures markets is required to post additional collateral — or margin — to the exchange if the price of the underlying asset rises. In normal times, this is accepted trading practice but in recent months the soaring price of electricity has meant the collateral requirements for utilities that have hedged their power sales — often months or years in advance — have ballooned.

As prices have soared their future positions have often fallen deep into the red, prompting exchanges to request more and more collateral, with larger generators at times facing calls to provide hundreds of millions of pounds or euros overnight. The positions will normally be profitable once the physical energy is sold but some will not mature for months or years, leaving the companies at risk of exhausting their existing credit lines.

Centrica, the owner of British Gas, is seeking billions of pounds in extra credit in case of a further spike in collateral demands, the Financial Times reported on Monday.

Finnish utility Fortum, which also owns Germany’s Uniper, said 10 days ago that the collateral it had tied up on the Nasdaq power exchange had increased by €1bn within a week, to approximately €5bn.

While companies such as Centrica and Fortum are likely to make a profit when the related power is eventually sold, the collateral requirements are resulting in a huge liquidity squeeze across the sector that officials and industry officials warn could mean profitable utilities collapse.

“Here were all the ingredients for the energy sector’s version of Lehman Brothers,” Finnish economy minister Mika Lintilä said on Sunday, referring to the Wall Street bank that collapsed during the 2008 global financial crisis.

Where do these trades take place?

Politicians’ criticisms that the markets are malfunctioning have put the spotlight on the main market operators for energy futures in Europe — Nasdaq in Sweden for electricity, ICE Futures Europe in London for oil and in Amsterdam for gas, and Germany’s EEX for electricity. They also run the clearing houses that manage the risks and exposure on open derivatives contracts, calculating payments every day that determine how much margin customers put down.

Regulations require most margin payments to be made in cash so that the funds are immediately available in the event of a problem. Some exchanges and clearing houses that mainly trade energy, particularly Spain, Sweden, Norway and Poland, accept bank guarantees from end users such as energy companies because the latter do not have a lot of cash or other collateral available compared with banks.

However, even those bank guarantees are only accepted if they are fully covered by cash.

Who provides the collateral?

To meet the exchanges’ collateral requirements, large utilities typically rely on established revolving credit facilities with their banks. In the past 12 months, as prices for gas and power have soared, many utilities have put in place additional liquidity facilities with the same lenders but there are signs that some are reaching the limits of their commercial credit lines.

RBC Capital Markets on Monday said that even “the strongest utilities” were facing “huge pressure in terms of collateral payments”. Sweden on Sunday said it would provide up to $23bn in credit guarantees to Nordic utilities to help them avoid technical defaults, while Finland has proposed a €10bn package.

Deepa Venkateswaran, European utilities analyst at Bernstein, said the intervention by the Swedish and Finnish governments suggested commercial credit lines had been tapped out. “Because the numbers are increasing quite significantly, maybe the banking system can’t bear it,” she said.

Which groups are most exposed?

Most electricity generators hedge their power contracts to some extent, meaning many power producers in Europe risk being exposed to the liquidity squeeze. Eurelectric, which represents more than 3,500 European utilities, warned on Monday that the ballooning payments were of “grave concern” to its members.

Even before August’s further price surge, several big utilities including Germany’s Uniper and France’s EDF had already run into severe difficulties. Both companies struggled to cover margin requirements when gas and power prices first started to rise in October last year. Since then, Uniper has been required to buy gas at record prices as deliveries from Russia have dried up, while EDF has had to import power to cover outages.

Venkateswaran said utilities with a high proportion of hydropower and nuclear energy, such as in Sweden and Finland, tended to hedge more than those reliant on other forms of power generation and were likely to be particularly exposed to the increased collateral requirements.

What can be done?

EU energy ministers will consider taking bloc-wide steps at an emergency meeting on Friday, according to officials briefed on the discussions. Power market players say governments have two main options: prepare to provide utilities with billions of euros of state-backed credit or modify the rules around margining.

At present, the EU’s European Market Infrastructure Regulation, which sets the legal framework for margin requirements, does not distinguish between power generators and pure financial counterparties. By reducing or removing the collateral that exchanges require from electricity producers, analysts argue regulators could ease the liquidity squeeze on utilities with limited risk to their counterparties. “These are companies with power generation assets, so they are not running away anywhere,” said Venkateswaran at Bernstein. “It’s different from someone who’s just speculating on power prices.”

John Musk, a European utilities and infrastructure analyst at RBC Capital Markets, also said “structural reforms” were likely to be required. “Supporting energy companies by moving collateral payments from their books on to the financial system/government books is perhaps not the ideal solution,” he said in a note on Monday.

One solution authorities may explore is to tweak the type of bank guarantees that electricity generators can post as collateral.

“Alleviating liquidity pressure on non-financial market participants by allowing fully committed on-demand bank guarantees should not be that far away,” said Rafael Plata, secretary general of Each, the European clearing house association. “If implemented through a fast-track procedure, we could see producers and consumers benefiting from it shortly, as they do in other jurisdictions like the US or Canada.”