|
You could be forgiven for taking China’s
boom for granted. The only subjects to have gotten more press in the
last year are global warming and David Hicks. All the attention on China
may have caused a little complacency, though. Perhaps we have actually
underestimated the magnitude and duration of China’s
industrialization.
“China’s energy demand will rise
about 4 percent every year to the equivalent of 2.7 billion tons of
standard coal by 2010, the government forecast on April 10,” Bloomberg
reports today. “The nation gets 78 percent of its electricity from
coal, prompting companies including China Coal to expand production as
prices increase. Domestic coal contract prices increased by as much as
10 percent, or an average of 20 to 30 yuan a ton in 2007.
Output will be little changed at 80
million metric tons of coal this year and increase 50 percent to 120
million tons in 2010.”
Gee that’s a lot of coal. You can
imagine that in addition to increasing its own production, China will
also continue to be a buyer of Australian thermal and coking coal. You
can also expect more anxiety over what all that coal (and carbon) means
to the planet. But what kind of cycle are we dealing with here?
Is China’s growth contingent on U.S.
consumption? If so, then China’s growth cycles will be highly
correlated to U.S. demand and U.S. interest rates. The two economies
will remain linked, and China’s voracious consumption of Australian
resources is merely a function of America’s voracious consumption of
manufactured Chinese goods, which in turn is merely a function of
America’s record-low saving and record-high debt levels and
record-stupid monetary policy. Can global growth really rely on the
stupidity of America’s central bankers?
No one ever looked foolish underestimating
the idiocy of central bankers, but…
There is another explanation that
suggests China’s resource-intensive boom, though linked inextricably
with American consumption, is also part of a larger, longer, and more
powerful economic cycle, maybe the last big resource-intensive cycle of
its kind in the history of this planet (good thing we’ve already got
another planet queued up for development.)
In other words, according to this second,
mega-historical explanation, China’s boom is not just a very large
symptom of the global credit boom, but the emergence of a large feudal,
agrarian economy into a large industrial economy. It is like Team
America’s emergence onto the global economic stage, but multiplied
times ten.
If that’s the case, it means China’s
growth is really just beginning. Ditto for India. And it means the bull
market in resources may last much much longer than any of us expected.
Indeed, the only real limit is that there may not be enough oil in the
world to produce refined fuels for the 140 million cars analysts predict
could hit Chinese roads in the next twenty years (perhaps this is
why China is trying to produce transportation fuel from
coal.)
Come to think of it, is there enough
water to grow the crops to feed the animals to supply the protein a
hungry world needs? Is there enough copper in Chile or iron or in the
Pillbara to turn China’s eastern seaboard into one giant home for 500
million people? How many air conditioners will it take to keep the place
cool? How many lights will have to turned on so you can see in a place
where smoke from coal-burning fire plants blots out the sun? Will Africa
become a giant raw-materials colony for China? Or is not just Africa but
Canada, Australia…and anyone else who has in abundance what China
needs to geep growing?
Of course, these kinds of massive
projections are also exactly the kind of garbage people say to convince
themselves to buy stocks at the top. Resource markets are always
cyclical. And there’s no reason to believe this one will be any
different. Still, we are nearly convinced that we may have seirously
underestimated the duration, intensity, and historical significance of
this cycle.
How? Well, strong Chinese demand has not
been self-correcting. Rising resource prices have not yet swamped the
market with new producers of raw materials. It takes a lot of money and
expertise and labour to produce more iron ore, coal, or gold. While the
money is abundant these days, labour and expertise are not, especially
in places like Western Australia and Queensland, where the resources
happen to be located.
This means that prices can stay higher
for longer than in past cycles. Again, we cringe at arguing with the
evidence of the past that cycles always turn. But we are merely
exploring the prospect that this migration of wealth from West to East
may be far more massive than we were thinking. It’s not just a matter
of a few people shifting portfolio allocations to have exposure to
Eastern markets. It’s a shift in the economic center of gravity of the
global economy, and it leaves Australia in an immensely enviable
position.
Dan Denning
The Daily Reckoning Australia

© 2007 Dan Denning
The
Daily Reckoning FSO Archives
Dan Denning
is the editor of The Daily Reckoning Australia. He’s
also the author of 2005’s best-selling The Bull Hunter (John Wiley
& Sons), and spent five years as editor of Strategic Investment, one
of the most respected “big-picture” investment newsletters on the
market.
www.dailyreckoning.com
|