Search This Blog

January 6, 2015

Brent Cook: investing during the era of peak #gold discoveries

We've hit peak economic gold discoveries, but unlike the new fracking technologies that saved the oil industry, there's no fracking technology to coax mineral wealth from ever-deeper deposits.

Brent Cook: investing during the era of peak gold discoveries
// Master Metals News

We've hit peak economic gold discoveries, but unlike the new fracking technologies that saved the oil industry, there's no fracking technology to coax mineral wealth from ever-deeper deposits. In the face of this shortage, expert geologist Brent Cook of Exploration Insights is scouting out companies that are cashed up and poised to deliver value when other miners may be left scraping the bottom of the barrel. In this interview with The Gold Report, find out what Cook expects for gold exploration in 2015, and why the next few years are going to be very interesting indeed for yellow metal miners.

The Gold Report: Brent, you've quoted Goldcorp Inc.'s (G:TSX; GG:NYSE) CEO, Charles Jeannes, saying that we've reached peak economic gold production. What led us to this point?

Brent Cook: That's a big question that really goes back to what was happening in the global exploration sector 20+ years ago. I don't want to get into the peak gold production idea but instead focus on the discovery curve and what's behind the problem we are seeing in the gold sector.

Why aren't we finding as many gold deposits as we used to, or at least as many economic deposits? In 1995 or so, the discovery boom in the gold sector peaked and that success is largely tied to the opening of large areas of earth that were previously off limits to serious exploration. Since then, exploration success and new discoveries have trended down. However, in terms of gold production, it's taken about 20 years for all those discoveries to work their way through the system to come into full production.

So what Charles Jeannes sees is that in 2015 or so, gold production is going to be tapering off as opposed to expanding. That's especially true given the current gold price and cost structure. A lot of these companies aren't making much money, or any money at all. They'll be shutting down loss-making projects over the coming years.

TGR: Are we running out of gold in the world, or did we just not make an investment in a timely manner, say, 20 years ago?

BC: No, we're not running out of gold. We're finding gold deposits, but most of them are not economic. That's really the issue here. For example, there are 20 million tons (20 Mt) gold in the ocean seawater, but it grades about 13 parts per trillion and will never be economic. It's that economic hurdle that is really at issue here.

In the 1990s, the world opened up to exploration. We found a lot of deposits sitting at the surface in jurisdictions that were once inaccessible, basically the low-hanging fruit. But by and large, there is a finite number of outcropping ore bodies and the few remaining are increasingly difficult to find. We've nearly exhausted the surface and are forced to drill for blind deposits through barren rock using really esoteric methods. The odds of success are much lower, and the costs are much higher.

I'll give you an interesting ballpark figure that is based on how geology and the earth work. For every, say, 10 gold deposits of 1 million ounces (1 Moz) grading 1 gram per tonne (1 g/t), the earth formed one deposit of 1 Moz that grades 2.5 g/t. Those are more or less the odds. The problem is that although a 1 g/t deposit may be economic at surface, when it lies under 200 meters of barren cover, it is no longer economic. The unfortunate reality for us explorers is that those odds mean that we are still going to find about ten 1 g/t deposits for every 2.5 g/t deposit. Our economic success rate has to go down, and the data back up that conclusion. That is also the reason we have so many companies boasting NI-43-101-compliant resources that in my view will never be converted to economic reserves—never.

TGR: Isn't there just a lot less investment in exploration happening right now, with companies trying to cut costs?

BC: Yes, that's a really good point. Exploration has been cut to the bone across the sector. In the junior sector, it's almost impossible to raise money for exploration. So, yes, we're not spending enough money to find quality deposits, and this situation is going to get worse. Additionally, consider the fact that new discoveries are going to cost more to make because 1) for the most part they are going to be deeper so they will require more drilling just to have a look, 2) as I mentioned previously, we are going to find more uneconomic or marginal deposits than economic ones, and 3) for the most part those uneconomic deposits will have to be drilled out just to see what they grade. So each new economic discovery will cost the industry more than in the past but we are spending considerably less looking. What does that tell you?

TGR: What's the lag time? When are we going to see the effect of that lack of investment?

BC: I think we'll start seeing it next year and, certainly, into the coming years. My investment thesis is that the mining companies that are currently in production are going to eventually wake up to the fact that they have nothing on-line to replace what they've been mining. That's when they're going to have to go out and buy the few deposits that make money. Those are the deposits you want to own early on.

Now the simple fix for what appears to be a fundamental gold supply-demand equation is, of course, higher gold prices. However, I'm not convinced there is, or will be, a gold supply problem that will translate directly into higher real prices that bail out the miners and their marginal deposits. Almost all the gold that has ever been produced is still available in some form or other and much of it potentially for sale at some price.

So, unless there's a real run on gold, as well as gold hoarding, we may not see the gold price rise to compensate for less economic deposits. Plus, as we saw in the last big boom in the gold price, input costs, labor, equipment, supplies, power—everything—rose in tandem with the gold price. So even with $1,300/ounce ($1,300/oz) gold, miners' margins didn't increase much. I think it's going to get really interesting in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

Some people are theorizing that new technology is going to change the game, as it did for peak oil. I don't see it. Hard rock geology and minerals mining are much more complex and difficult than oil and gas extraction. We can and do continually make small improvements in technology, metallurgy and such that take a few dollars or tens of dollars off the per ounce production costs, but those aren't anything like the fracking technology.

TGR: Even when discoveries are made, is it getting more difficult to get permission to mine in many parts of the world?

BC: That's another consideration. Let's say you do make a discovery. Inevitably, you have social issues to deal with. You have politicians and everyone within a hundred miles yelling for their piece of the pie. You have permitting to go through, and permitting is much more difficult than it used to be. In 1995, it took maybe 10 years to get a big deposit into production. It's now averaging 10–20 years to get a big deposit into production. So these mining companies have to look at a discovery and make some projections, not just as to what the gold price is going to be 15 years down the road but, also, what the labor costs are going to be, what the power costs are going to be. And those unquantifiable risks keep companies from making investments.

TGR: Are there some places that are easier to do business in than others?

BC: Most certainly. I think Canada is pretty good, and Quebec is a great place. In the U.S., Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, parts of Idaho are good places to work. Mexico in general and a lot of places in Latin America are good including Peru and Chile, although with Chile one has to consider water and power issues early on. West Africa is generally good. So there are certainly safer places to work. But there's always a risk things will change politically. We recently saw Zambia raise the royalty on companies from 6% to 20%, and Barrick Gold Corp. (ABX:TSX; ABX:NYSE) shut down its copper mine.

TGR: Based on all of that, what companies are doing exploration the right way, have the right teams in place and have the money to execute on them?

BC: Not that many. If you're looking to buy an exploration company, first off is always the people. That's really critical in an exploration company. Are the technical people on the ground smart enough and competent enough to recognize a good system and explore it properly and, more importantly, do they know when to cut bait? Unfortunately, in this sector, people sometimes keep drilling and drilling and drilling on a project because that's how they make their living. You want to own a company that has a technical team that knows what a deposit looks like and knows what one doesn't look like. Then you need a company that has the cash to keep going—there are getting to be fewer and fewer of those—and a share structure that's not blown out in shape.

TGR: What companies do meet those standards?

BC: Mirasol Resources Ltd. (MRZ:TSX.V) has been successful in Argentina. It sold a deposit and has on the order of ~$20 million ($20M) now in the bank. It has picked up property in Chile that has never really been explored. The company is having some real success early on in defining these new targets.

TGR: Mirasol just released news on that property, the Gorbea property in Chile, and the market seemed to react positively. Does the company have other catalysts coming up?

BC: It has a joint venture with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (FM:TSX; FQM:LSE) in Chile as well, with First Quantum spending ~$5M testing one of its porphyry copper targets. If that hits, it'll be major. The Gorbea project is very early stage—just trenching, geophysics, geology. But it is finding some really nice-looking targets that I suspect will be drilled in 2015 by a partner.

TGR: Your next name?

BC: Reservoir Minerals Inc. (RMC:TSX.V) has probably made one of the best discoveries in the past few years in partnership with Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc.'s (FCX:NYSE) exploration in Serbia. It defined something like 65 Mt grading 3.1% copper equivalent. This thing sits under 400 meters of barren rock. Reservoir has ~$38M in the bank and a number of 100%-owned projects surrounding the discovery that it is testing right now. A successful discovery there would be huge for the company. And they're smart people; they know what they're doing.

TGR: What about the African projects? Are you watching those as well?

BC: In Cameroon, it is very early stage. It turned up some very encouraging early results, trenching rock samples, that sort of thing. It is a company that will probably joint venture most projects. Certainly in Africa, it builds them up to the stage where there's a solid drill target and then brings somebody in to drill it and, if it's successful, mine it.

TGR: Great. Another name?

BC: Pilot Gold Inc. (PLG:TSX) is a very smart group that is doing good work. Its predecessor sold its project in Nevada to Newmont Mining Corp. (NEM:NYSE). This is a project that Pilot didn't actually discover, but it brought it forward, explained it to the market and was able to sell it. Pilot has a project in Nevada, Kinsley Mountain, where it discovered Carlin-style mineralization out where nobody expected it. It's not yet big enough to be economic, but it points to how qualified Pilot is. It has a project in Turkey, TV Tower, in joint venture with Teck Resources Ltd. (TCK:TSX; TCK:NYSE), where Teck is probably going to be contributing 40%. This is a master cluster of porphyry intrusives. I like the look of it. So I think that's certainly something to watch next year. Again, it is financed. It's all set. We don't have to worry about the company going broke.

TGR: What are some other companies that fit your criteria?

BC: Sometime early this year, I think we're going to see a bit of optimism in the mining sector, including the gold sector and the junior sector. I wanted to buy some companies that were in safe jurisdictions, were well known and had the cash to move forward.

Lake Shore Gold Corp. (LSG:TSX) has turned around its deposit in Ontario. It's banking good money. It's paying down its debt. If the market improves, so will the share price. It's not something that I'm going to hold forever. It's just hoping to make 20–50% on something into this year.

Premier Gold Mines Ltd. (PG:TSX) is a very competent group. It has cash. Its Hardrock deposit actually looks like it's going to work. That's something that I think another company should buy. Premier has projects in Nevada and in the Red Lake District of Ontario as well.

Kaminak Gold Corp. (KAM:TSX.V) has made a very nice discovery in the Yukon, ~3 Moz gold. A lot of it is oxidized. It looks as if it will work as a heap-leach operation. Again, it's a safe jurisdiction and it's a good group. I think it will attract attention, should the market improve next year.

TGR: Do all three of those companies have the money to move forward?

BC: Lake Shore and Premier certainly do. Kaminak is putting together a feasibility study, so sometime this year it will probably want to raise money. But it's not going broke, for sure. Ross Beaty and Lucas Lundin just put money into it.

TGR: That's a vote of confidence.

BC: It's pretty encouraging, yes.

TGR: You've commented that the gold price has held up surprisingly well in many currencies, with much of the downside behind us. You even ventured that we could see some temporary optimism. Give us something to be hopeful about.

BC: It's been bad so long that it has to get good. I think it's a reasonable speculation that we're going to see some optimism in 2015, but overall, I'm not terribly positive toward the junior sector or the gold price in the short term. I think 2015 looks a lot like this year did. The upside there is that we're going to have real opportunities to buy the few quality exploration groups and deposits that will be much more valuable come 2016 and 2017.

TGR: Gold prices and junior mining stocks are often very cyclical. You have tax-loss selling, then you have the "January effect" and then "sell in May and go away." Do those clichés still hold up in today's market? Can we expect a January effect in 2015?

BC: I think so. That's my bet on those last three stocks we talked about, but who knows. It's been a pretty crazy couple of years.

TGR: Thanks for sharing your insights, Brent.

BC: My pleasure.

Brent Cook brings more than 30 years of experience to his role as a geologist, consultant and investment adviser. His knowledge spans all areas of the mining business, from the conceptual stage through detailed technical and financial modeling related to mine development and production. Cook's weekly Exploration Insights newsletter focuses on early discovery, high-reward opportunities, primarily among junior mining and exploration companies.

The post Brent Cook: investing during the era of peak gold discoveries appeared first on MINING.com.

Source: JT Long of The Gold Report  

DISCLOSURE:
1) JT Long conducted this interview for Streetwise Reports LLC, publisher of The Gold Report, The Energy Report, The Life Sciences Report and The Mining Report, and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an employee. She owns, or her family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.
2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Pilot Gold Inc. and Premier Gold Mines Ltd. Goldcorp Inc. is not affiliated with Streetwise Reports. The companies mentioned in this interview were not involved in any aspect of the interview preparation or post-interview editing so the expert could speak independently about the sector. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.
3) Brent Cook: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: Pilot Gold Inc., Mirasol Resources Ltd., Reservoir Minerals Inc., Kaminak Gold Corp., Lake Shore Gold Corp., Premier Gold Mines Ltd. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I determined and had final say over which companies would be included in the interview based on my research, understanding of the sector and interview theme. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.
4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts' statements without their consent.
5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports' terms of use and full legal disclaimer.
6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise during the up-to-four-week interval from the time of the interview until after it publishes.

Streetwise – The Gold Report is Copyright © 2014 by Streetwise Reports LLC. All rights are reserved. Streetwise Reports LLC hereby grants an unrestricted license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material (i) only in whole (and always including this disclaimer), but (ii) never in part.

Streetwise Reports LLC does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported.

Streetwise Reports LLC receives a fee from companies that are listed on the home page in the In This Issue section. Their sponsor pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1734.

Participating companies provide the logos used in The Gold Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.


----

Shared via my feedly reader

December 4, 2014

#MasterEnergy: US proved #oil reserves increase 5th year in a row; U.S. #natgas proved reserves now at all-time high

#NorthDakota leads with 2bn barrel increase, now has more reserves than Gulf of Mexico 

U.S. proved reserves of oil increase for the fifth year in a row in 2013; U.S. natural gas proved reserves increase 10% and are now at an all-time high

*****
Energy Information Administration (EIA) Logo - Need Help? 202-586-8800
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 4, 2014

U.S. proved reserves of oil increase for the fifth year in a row in 2013; U.S. natural gas proved reserves increase 10% and are now at an all-time high

  • North Dakota proved oil reserves surpass the Gulf of Mexico
  • Pennsylvania and West Virginia account for 70% of increase in natural gas reserves

U.S. crude oil proved reserves increased for the fifth year in a row in 2013, a net addition of 3.1 billion barrels of proved oil reserves (a 9% increase) according to U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Proved Reserves, 2013, released today by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

U.S. natural gas proved reserves increased 10% in 2013, more than replacing the 7% decline in proved reserves seen in 2012, and raising the U.S. total to a record level of 354 trillion cubic feet (Tcf).

  Crude oil and lease condensate
billion barrels
Wet natural gas
trillion cubic feet
2012 U.S. proved reserves 33.4 322.7
Net additions to U.S. proved reserves +3.1 +31.3
2013 U.S. proved reserves 36.5 354.0
Percentage change 9% 10%

At the state level, North Dakota led in additions of oil reserves (adding almost 2 billion barrels of proved oil reserves in 2013, a 51% increase from 2012) because of development of the Bakken and Three Forks formations in the Williston Basin. North Dakota's proved oil reserves surpassed those of the federal offshore Gulf of Mexico for the first time in 2013. Texas (still the state with the largest proved reserves of oil) had the second largest increase, adding 903 million barrels of proved oil reserves in 2013.

Pennsylvania and West Virginia reported the largest net increases in natural gas proved reserves in 2013, driven by continued development of the Marcellus Shale play, the largest U.S. shale gas play based on proved reserves. Combined, these two states added 21.8 Tcf of natural gas proved reserves in 2013 (13.5 Tcf in Pennsylvania and 8.3 Tcf in West Virginia) and were 70% of the net increase in proved natural gas reserves in 2013. U.S. production of both oil and natural gas increased in 2013: Production of crude oil and lease condensate increased 15% (rising from 6.5 to 7.4 million barrels per day), while U.S. production of natural gas increased 2% (rising from 71 to 73 billion cubic feet per day).

Proved reserves are those volumes of oil and natural gas that geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions. An increase in natural gas prices used to characterize existing economic conditions contributed to the reported increase in proved natural gas reserves. For example, the 12-month first-of-the-month average natural spot price at Henry Hub increased from $2.75 per million Btu (MMBtu) in 2012 to $3.66 per MMBtu in 2013.

EIA's estimates of proved reserves are based on an annual survey of domestic oil and gas well operators.

U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Proved Reserves, 2013 is available at: http://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/crudeoilnaturalgasreserves.

The product described in this press release was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analysis, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in the product and press release therefore should not be construed as representing those of the Department of Energy or other federal agencies.

EIA Program Contact: Steven G. Grape, 202-586-1868, Steven.Grape@eia.gov
EIA Press Contact: Jonathan Cogan, 202-586-8719, Jonathan.Cogan@eia.gov

EIA-2014-11

U.S. Energy Information Administration

November 21, 2014

#EIA launches new tool for crude #oil import analysis #MasterEnergy


EIA launches new tool for crude oil import analysis

Today EIA released a new U.S. Crude Oil Import Tracking Tool that allows policymakers, analysts, and the public to more easily track trends in crude oil imports. Users can sort and display crude oil imports by month or year, by crude type (i.e., light, medium, heavy), country source, port of entry, processing company, processing refinery, and more. The tool features graphing and mapping capabilities and a built-in help function.

Recent and forecast increases in domestic crude production have sparked discussion about how rising crude oil volumes will be absorbed. To date, a primary mechanism for absorbing increased production has been the displacement of imported crude oil, which has fallen from 8.9 million barrels per day (bbl/d) in 2011 to 7.5 million bbl/d in August 2014.

This tool sheds light on the adjustments to imports being made in response to growing production of crude oil within the United States. It is one part of EIA's ongoing effort to assess the effects of a possible relaxation of current limitations on U.S. crude oil exports, which is another avenue to accommodate domestic production growth. EIA is undertaking further work on this larger question, and expects to issue more analysis reports over the coming months.

Launched on EIA's beta site to solicit customer feedback, and incorporate that feedback into the final release, the new tool represents EIA's latest step in making energy data more accessible, understandable, relevant, and responsive to users' needs. The U.S. Crude Oil Import Tracking Tool can be found at: http://www.eia.gov/beta/petroleum/imports/browser/

Also released today is a report, EIA's U.S. Crude Oil Import Tracking Tool: Selected Sample Applications, that provides examples of the application of the new tool. The examples were selected to illustrate the tool's capabilities to access information from EIA's monthly Company Level Import database for different time periods, regions, companies, and crude oil qualities. Using the tool yielded the following insights regarding recent trends in U.S. crude oil imports:

  • Volume and quality of U.S. crude oil imports: U.S. crude oil imports have declined since 2010, with nearly all of the decline occurring in light sweet grades. In particular, U.S. light crude imports fell 71% between 2010 and the period January through August 2014.
  • Source of U.S. crude oil imports: Imports of light crude from Africa, particularly from Nigeria and Algeria, have declined by 93%.
  • Light crude oil imports by region: The largest decline in crude oil imports occurred on the Gulf Coast (PADD 3), down 94%. Light crude oil imports by East Coast (PADD 1) refiners were down 69%, reflecting both their increased use of domestic crudes and modestly lower refinery runs.
  • Refinery-level trends in light crude imports: Imports by the 10 largest refineries using imported light crude in 2013 accounted for 55% of total U.S. light crude imports, with the remaining 45% scattered among more than 100 other refineries. The largest source for light crude imports among this group of 10 refineries was Canada, followed by Nigeria and Mexico. Of these 10 refineries, 3 are located on the East Coast, 2 in the Midwest, 3 on the Gulf Coast, and 2 on the West Coast.
  • Refinery-level trends in imports other than light sweet crude: There is evidence that some refineries have recently reduced imports of medium and heavy grades of crude oil in order to accommodate increasing light domestic production. Other refiners, which have made changes in processing equipment to accommodate heavier crudes, have increased their imports of such crudes.
The product described in this press release was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analysis, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in the product and press release therefore should not be construed as representing those of the Department of Energy or other federal agencies.

EIA Press Contact: Jonathan Cogan, 202-586-8719, jonathan.cogan@eia.gov

EIA-2014-10

ShareThis

MasterMetals’ Tweets