Germany

As an example of the fine pursuit of high ideals, Germany’s drive for clean energy could not be finer. Whether you hold to the majority view regarding the arguments on global warning or you are one of the naysayers is not the point, the world only has so much fossil fuel and almost no one would deny the world can only absorb so much carbon dioxide without eventually impacting the environment, so a move to less polluting renewable power is a fine goal. But as an example of how not to do it, Germany could not be offering a clearer picture.

FREE Download: The Monthly MMI® Report – covering the Renewable Energy metals market.

The FT reported this week on Berlin’s dilemma, ambitious at the best of times under a policy known as Energiewende, or “energy change,” the government aims to derive 80% of Germany’s electricity from carbon-free sources by 2050. As a result of generous subsidies since 2000, the renewables sector has grown to provide over 25% of Germany’s electricity today, at a huge cost to consumers. According to the FT, German households pay twice as much for electricity as their US counterparts, while prices for industrial customers have risen more than 30% over the past 4 years, no doubt adding to the challenge faced by Germany’s economy teetering on the edge of recession.

For some bizarre reason, Angela Merkel promptly closed 8 of the country’s 17 nuclear reactors following the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Where the connection between Japan’s tsunami and Germany’s inland nuclear plants comes from is a mystery to most outside the country, but in a society still sensitive to the risks of nuclear energy in the aftermath of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, there is widespread public support for the closures. The result, though, is that the environmental targets have taken a backwards lurch as coal-fired power stations have been fired up to meet demand. It’s worse in Germany than elsewhere because the country’s coal-fired power stations are reliant on the lowest-grade. most-polluting lignite coal, a resource which Germany has in abundance.

Germany’s 2050 goal may yet be achieved. but the evidence so far suggests the journey will be painful, polluting and seriously expensive.

Earlier this year, the Commerce Department imposed steep duties on importers of Chinese solar panels made from certain components in a valiant effort to protect US manufacturers… based in Germany.

FREE Download: The Monthly MMI® Report – covering the Renewable Energy metals market.

Friday, Commerce doubled down and announced even more import duties on silicon photovoltaic products- including cells, modules, laminates and/or panels – that might be used in production of solar power from China and Taiwan.

Commerce initially determined that crystalline silicon photovoltaic products from China and Taiwan have been sold in the US at dumping margins ranging from 26.33 to 58.87 percent, and 27.59 to 44.18 percent, respectively. China’s Trina Solar faces total import duties of nearly 30 percent and Suntech Power nearly 50 percent as a result of the decision. Taiwanese producers face anti-dumping duties of up to 44.18 percent, with the highest rate applying to Motech Industries “Dumping” occurs when commerce determines that a foreign company has received state subsidies to sell its products at a lower rate there.

Yet these decisions are really just a small part of a long trade dispute between the Chinese solar panel manufacturers and SolarWorld Industries America, the Portland, Ore.-based subsidiary of German parent company, SolarWorld AG based in Bonn. SolarWorld is making the complaints and our regulators are valiantly protecting Germany’s right to do business here. They are World Cup Champions, after all.

Read more

An improvement in growth for the European Union and a renewed willingness to buy government debt in the distressed periphery has us clapping our hands in admiration at the turnaround the region has achieved in just the last 12 to 18 months.

The rot was stopped in the summer of 2012 around the time of EU President of the European Central Bank Mario Draghi’s statement that the bank would do whatever it took to keep the euro together and fund those states that were all but closed off to international credit marks at anything like a sustainable borrowing rate.

But according to an FT article, even the International Monetary Fund does not believe Europe is out the woods and, put simply, is just one negative shock away from outright deflation.

FREE Download: The Monthly MMI® Report – price trends for 10 metal markets.

What exactly is the problem?

Read more

Read the first part of this post here

Would the US, Britain, or Japan change policy at the request of foreign powers because the foreign powers were, relatively, not doing as well? I don’t think so, especially if that meant lower support for exporters and industry, stoking inflation, and boosting internal consumption when the economy already has the lowest unemployment rate in Europe.

The villain here is not Germany, but the Euro. Arguably, if Germany left the Euro, one could see some immediate corrective swings occurring. Germany’s new currency would rise dramatically against the “new” Euro, and the remaining Euro countries would benefit from a massive devaluation in their currency, boosting competitiveness.

Find out more about MetalMiner’s price forecasting capability to help your metal sourcing efforts.

Unfortunately, there would be no one to fund the hundreds of billions of dodgy loans and outright debt the area is saddled with. Because what is oft overlooked is the fact that Germany has been the largest contributor to the European Stability Fund and the European Central Bank. German guarantees supporting the existing bailout fund amount to €211 billion ($285 billion). The ESM will require a capital contribution from Germany. If the ESM lends its full commitment of €500 billion ($675 billion) and the recipients default, Germany’s liability could be as high as €280 billion ($378 billion).

As the FT points out, the size of these exposures is huge in relation to Germany’s GDP of around €2.5 trillion, and German household assets estimated at €4.7 trillion. Nor is Germany without its own problems. It has substantial levels of its own debt (over 80% of GDP), an ageing population, and deteriorating dependency ratios, to compound its problems.

Don’t forget to read October 2013 MMI analysis before November’s full report comes out next week!

No wonder Germany suggested taking over the running of the Greek economy early in 2012. They wanted to be sure a major default didn’t start a domino effect that would end at Germany’s doorstep.

Read more

Some American business folk look at Germany’s industrial policy with a little envy. Germany, it seems, is willing to do just about anything to support its manufacturing industries and the benefits are plain to see. With a vibrant manufacturing sector exporting around the world, it doesn’t get any better than brand Germany when it comes to machine tools, manufacturing equipment, automotive technology, and much else.

At the same time Germany is often looked upon as one of the good guys, respecting intellectual property and international law, while leading Europe out of its mess of debt and incontinent tax collection with fiscal responsibility. But not all would agree.

Paul Krugman, the influential Professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University, is well known for his liberal views on trade and international economics. His view of Germany is somewhat different from the above, as he recent opined in a NY Times article.

Find out more about MetalMiner’s price forecasting capability to help your metal sourcing efforts.

In Krugman’s view, Germany has taken the place of China as the current account running bogeyman of the world economy. For one, Germany has overtaken China as the running the world’s largest current account surplus; both in absolute terms and in terms of a share of GDP, it is twice China’s. That alone Krugman views as bad enough. One country’s surplus is another’s deficit, he says, and he notes that Germany has been running a surplus for a decade, but earlier these were offset by equally massive deficits in many European countries.

Europe as a whole ran a small surplus with the rest of the world. Germany remains dependent on its neighbors, with 69% of total exports going to European countries, including 57% to the member states of the European Union. Of course, not all neighbors are equal. In 2012, Germany ran a trade deficit of €27 billion ($36 billion) with Russia, Libya, and Norway, mainly for energy imports.

Read more

This is the second in a two-part series. The first part can be found here.

The IHS research quoted on 24/7WallStreet.com reckons that high energy prices will cost the German economy 40,000 jobs in the chemicals sector by 2030 under one pricing scenario, while machinery and motor vehicle manufacturing could lose 85,000 and 87,000 jobs. Not only do solar and wind raise costs, they also reduce stability. The rising and setting of the sun can be predicted to seconds, but the intensity of light and KWhrs of power are less reliable. Wind is even worse, leaving generating capacity idle during peak demand one day but contributing the next. Under such circumstances, most countries ensure a base load of supply by maintaining low-cost always-on power sources such as nuclear or coal.

Free! Download this month’s MMI® Report on price trends for the global precious metals market. 

The drive to renewables in Germany should run counter to maintaining a high dependency on coal, but (and some may say hypocritically) Germany has five new coal-fired power plants with a combined capacity of around 4 GW going through their “first fire” trials this summer. Although generators are at pains to stress how very efficient these new plants are, much of Germany’s coal-fired power production uses lignite, the dirtiest form of coal. Overall, Germany’s coal-fired power plants (including lignite) contributed more than 50% to the nation’s electricity demand in the first half of this year, with more coal-fired capacity likely to be commissioned before the first nuclear plant is taken out of service in 2015, Platts tells us.

Read more

Germany has long been admired for its economic achievements. At our Commodity/PROcurement Edge conference last week, Nucor, one of our sponsors, spoke of Germany’s industrial success as being built on its model of long-term investment. Regardless of which party led the government, Germany maintained a focus on manufacturing and technological development as a long-term goal for its economy, a position not followed by its partners in the European Union, despite what they may say.

That focus has kept Germany as the second most successful exporter in the world, with an account balance of $208,100,000,000 in 2012– which is just a whisker behind China’s $213,800,000,000, according to the CIA Data Book. Germany is a world leader certainly in technological sophistication and quality, along with machine tools, automotive, chemicals, steel, and machinery. Its economy is the fifth largest in the world and by far the largest in the EU. And Germany has achieved this while having the lowest unemployment and highest standard of living of any major EU country, with the former at 6.5%.

FREE Download: The Monthly MMI® Report – price trends for the renewables market.

The German model has arguably been sustained in recent years by the formation of the single currency. If instead of the Euro, Germany still maintained the Deutschmark, the resulting strength of the mark would be causing immense problems for Germany’s export-led manufacturing economy, in much the same way as it is for Switzerland now and had been for Japan before they embarked on QE and currency depreciation. But these speculations miss the point, as Germany is part of the European Union, and if at times they seem reluctant to support their fellow members– whom their success in part depends on– who can blame them for not wanting to take on the rest of Europe’s debts? Read more

Continued from Part One.

According to the Telegraph, over 100 German ship funds have already shut down as the crisis in global container shipping comes to a head, while 800 more funds are threatened with insolvency, according to consultants TPW in Hamburg.

In the UK, Britain’s oldest ship-owner, Stephenson Clark, dating back to 1730, went into liquidation this month, closing the final chapter of Britain’s coal trade and the industrial revolution, citing “incredibly depressed” vessel rates. Like large parts of the German container industry, the firm over-invested in the boom four years ago, betting too much on Asian growth rates.

Germany, however, is said to be the superpower of container shipping, controlling almost 40 percent of the world market; so if collectively they get it wrong, it goes wrong in a big way.

Read more

The Baltic Dry Index (BDI) usually steals the headlines when it comes to discussion of the world’s shipping fleets, and is often quoted when analysis of the global economy refers to international trade.

The Dry Index is a measure of bulk shipping rates and although the Baltic Exchange quotes a range of vessel sizes and types, it is often the large dry bulk carriers carrying iron ore, coal and grains that steal the limelight.

This is hardly surprising; the volume of such bulk commodities is a measure of global economic activity and the rates charged for carrying such commodities are in part a reflection of the level of demand or volumes. But not in total, of course: the supply of space also plays its part as is the case in the current market.

Read more

Japan is facing an electricity crunch this summer, potentially so severe, that companies such as Komatsu, the world’s No. 2 maker of construction machinery, have said they will move factories overseas if electricity supply isn’t guaranteed.

Bloomberg reports that all but one of Japan’s 54 reactors are now offline after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami last year crippled Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear station. The reactors, which previously supplied 30 percent of Japan’s electricity, have either been closed by the disaster, by government order or not allowed to restart after regular maintenance shutdowns. The remaining one reactor is due to close on May 5 for maintenance.

“Did You Pay the Gas Bill?”

As a result, Japan’s fuel import bill has sky rocketed. Liquefied natural gas imports rose to a record in 2011 as utilities have been forced to rely on fossil fuel power plants to replace idled reactors. Japan imported 1.75 million kiloliters of oil, or about 369,000 barrels a day, for power generation in February, more than four times as much as a year ago, according to data from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry in a separate article, while imports for power generation were up 15 percent from January alone.

There seems to be a government-led imperative to get some of these nuclear plants back online as Kansai Electric, the utility most dependent on nuclear at 49 percent of generating capacity, warns it may fall nearly 20 percent short this summer. The company serves the Kansai area of western Japan that covers an area the size of Belgium, has an economy worth $1 trillion — about the size of Mexico’s — and is home to the cities of Osaka and Kyoto as well as factories of Sharp Corp. and Panasonic Corp., Bloomberg reports.

Bring Back Nuclear, They Say

Although much controversy remains, even some local politicians and the general public appear to be favoring re-starts as employment suffers in areas where plants dominate the local economies. Overseas reaction to nuclear energy post-Fukushima, however, vary. Germany still plans to close all its plants by 2020, and even in France questions are being asked about expansion to what is one of the world’s most comprehensive nuclear generating networks.

But emerging markets are still showing enthusiasm for nuclear power as a secure provider of low greenhouse gas-emitting base-load electricity.

In Turkey, China is said to be close to securing a contract to finance and build a plant on Turkey’s Black Sea coast, in spite of the Chinese touting older technology. China is developing newer technologies off its own back as it is prevented from poaching the technologies of Westinghouse and Areva, who are constructing plants for the Chinese in what is currently the world’s largest nuclear construction program — but don’t be surprised if the Chinese “discover” very similar solutions to the technical challenges solved by Western firms.

Meanwhile, Turkey already has another plant planned with a Russian manufacturer, and Russia’s Rosatom is said to be keen to bid for the construction of two plants in the UK’s program of plant replacements, according to the Telegraph. It would seem that while many countries share Japan’s safety concerns, the cost associated with the alternatives — whether they are self-inflicted by Co2 emission targets or real ones such as import bills – mean nuclear remains a viable alternative if not an outright necessity.