The chart shows the top nuclear power producing countries from 1985 to 2010. The chart created by Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog may be used with attribution. Data from US Department of Energy.___________________
Nuclear power provided 14% of the world’s electricity in 2010. Wind power capacity increased 233% Worldwide from 2005 2010, to a total of 2.5% of global electricity needs. Nuclear power generation declined by .72% for the same period.
Burning coal was responsible for 41% of electricity generation in 2010. Burning natural gas accounted for 21% and hydroelectric generation accounted for 15%.
Japan just announced that they have closed their last operating nuclear power plant. They have no nuclear power plant generating electricity for the first time in more than 40 years. It will be interesting to see how low their actual generation totals fall this year. They plan to re-open some of the plants but it is a political issue that is far from settled.
Globally nuclear power production increased 84% from 1985 to 2010. This is a very low percentage. Global output over that period increased much more than that, as did global electricity use. The share of electricity production provided by nuclear power peaked at about 17% for much of the 1990s.
Related: Nuclear Power Production Globally from 1985 to 2009 – Oil Production by Country 1999-2009 – Top 10 Countries for Manufacturing Production from 1980 to 2010: China, USA, Japan, Germany… – Japan to Add Personal Solar Subsidies – Nuclear Energy Institute (statistics)
Another view of data on nuclear power shows which of the leading nuclear producing countries have the largest percentages of their electrical generating capacity provided by nuclear power plants (as of 2009). France has 75% of all electricity generated from nuclear power. Ukraine had the second largest percentage at 49%, then Sweden at 37% and South Korea at 35%. Japan is at 28% compared to 20% for the USA. Russia was at 18% and China was at just 2%.
Chart showing loan delinquency rates from 2001-2011. It shows seasonally adjusted data for all banks for consumer and real estate loans. The chart is available for use with attribution. Data from the Federal Reserve.
2011 saw delinquency rates for loans fall across the board in the USA. Residential real estate delinquency rates fell just 25 basis points (to a still extremely large 9.86%). Commercial real estate delinquency rates fell an impressive 186 basis points (to a still high 6.12%). Credit card delinquency rates fell 86 basis points to a 17 year low, 3.27%.
The job market continues to struggle, though it is doing fairly well the last few months. The serious long term problems created by governments spending beyond their means (for decades) and allowing too big to fail institutions to destroy economic wealth and create great risk to the economy are not easy to solve: and we made no progress in doing so in 2011. The reduction in delinquency rates is a good sign for the economy. The residential real estate delinquency rates are still far too high as is government debt. And the failure to address the too big to fail (big donors to the politicians) is continuing to cause great damage to the economy.
We need to reduce consumer and government debt. Many corporations are actually flush with cash, so at least we don’t have a huge corporate debt problem. Reducing debt load will decrease risks to the economy and provide wealth for consumers to tap as they move into retirement. The too-big-to-fail big political donors like to keep policies in place that encourage too much debt and favor complex financial instruments that they take huge fees from and then let the government deal with the aftermath. The politicians continued favors to too-big-to-fail institutions is very damaging to out economic well being.
Across the board, the wealthy economies are facing a rapidly aging population (the USA is actually acing this at a much slower rate than most other rich countries – which is helpful).
Related: Consumer and Real Estate Loan Delinquency Rates 2000-2011 – Real Estate and Consumer Loan Delinquency Rates 1998-2009 – Government Debt as Percent of GDP 1998-2010 for OECD
I really can’t figure out which currency is something I would want to hold if I had the option. It doesn’t really matter, since I am not going to act on it in a very direct way (maybe if I felt very strongly I would do something but it would probably be pretty limited), but I still keep thinking about this issue out of curiosity.
The USA dollar seems lousy to me. Huge debt (both government and consumer). Government debt is huge on the books and huge off the books (state and local retirement – and federal medical care [social security is really in much better shape than people think, though it also has issues 30 + years out}).
The Euro seemed a bit lame 3 years ago. Today it seems crazy to think at least one Euro country won’t default in the next 3 years – and likely more. And fi they take steps to avoid that it seems like it is going to make the case for the Euro worse).
The Japanese Yen is much strong than makes any sense to me. I think it is mainly because of how lousy all the options are. The huge government debt (worse that almost anywhere) and lousy demographics (and the refusal to deal with demographics with immigration or something) are big problems. The biggest reason for strength is that the individuals have huge savings (when your citizens own the debt it is much less horrible than when others do – especially when you are looking at currency value).
The Chinese Yuan is the best looking at the economic data. The problem is economic data is questionable for the best cases (looking at the USA, Japan…). China’s economic data is far from transparent. Their is also great political and social risk. The current worries of a real estate bubble seems justified to me and China just this week took exactly the wrong action – trying to prop up the bubble (in order to decrease the economic slowdown). I can see either of these cases playing out 10 years from now: It was obvious the Yuan was the strongest currency you are an idiot for not being able to see that or It was obvious China was a bubble with unsustainable policies and likely social upheaval thinking that was anything but a sign to sell the Yuan was foolish.
Given all this I think I weakly come down on the side that the Yuan is likely to be the strongest.
The safest play I think is the US dollar (as lousy as it is on an absolute basis the options make it look almost good). It could get clobbered. But that seems less likely than the others getting clobbered.
Smaller currencies have some promise but they can be swamped by global moves. I really have no idea about the Brazilian Real. That might actually be a really good option. The Australian Dollar and Canadian Dollar may also. But those economies are really small. I don’t trust India: they have many good macro-economic factors but the climate for business leaves far too much to be desired (as does the pace of progress fixing those weaknesses). Many economist like them due to demographic factors. I understand that demographic factors will help, but without systemic reform I question how well India can do (it certainly has the potential to do amazingly well, but they seem to be significantly farther away from reaching their potential compared to many countries).
The Singapore Dollar seems good on many levels, but the economy is small. I am not really sure about emerging economies, there currencies can get swamped in a hurry. Thailand and Indonesia experienced this recently. Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia are interesting to me in thinking about what their currencies may experience, I would like to read more on this.
This is more an intellectual and curiosity exercise than something I see directly tied to my investing strategy. But having clear answers of what I thought reasonable scenarios were for currencies going forward that would factor into my investing decisions. Right now, the confusing this causes me, leads me to favor companies that should be fine whatever happens: Apple, Google, Toyota, Intel (I don’t really like Facebook overall but in this way they fit). Lots of the stocks in my 12 stocks for 10 years portfolio, you might notice.
Related: Is the Euro Going to Survive in the Long Run? – Why the Dollar is Falling – Strong Singapore Dollar – Warren Buffett Cautions Against Buying Long Term USD Bonds
3 Economic Misconceptions That Need to Die
…
Just 6.4% of nondurable goods — things like food, clothing and toys — purchased in the U.S. are made in China; 76.2% are made in America. For durable goods — things like cars and furniture — 12% are made in China; 66.6% are made in America.
Those numbers are significantly less than I expected but the concept matches my understanding – that we greatly underestimate the purchasing of USA goods and services.
We have an inflated notion of how large the China macro economic numbers are for the USA (both debt and manufacturing exports to us). The China growth in both is still amazingly large: we just overestimate the totals today. We also forget that 25 years ago both numbers (imports from China and USA government debt owned by China) were close to 0.
We also greatly underestimate how much manufacturing the USA does, as I have been writing about for years. In fact, until 2010, the USA manufactured more than China.
Who owns the rest? The largest holder of U.S. debt is the federal government itself. Various government trust funds like the Social Security trust fund own about $4.4 trillion worth of Treasury securities. The Federal Reserve owns another $1.6 trillion.
Ok, this figure is a bit misleading. But even if you thrown out the accounting games 1.13/8.9 = 12.7%. That is a great deal. But it isn’t a majority of the debt or anything remotely close. Other foreign investors own $3.5 trillion trillion in federal debt (Japan $1 trillion, UK $500 billion). The $4.6 trillion of federal debt owned by foreigners is a huge problem. With investors getting paid so little for that debt though it isn’t one now. But it is a huge potential problem. If interest reates increase it will be a huge transfer of wealth from the USA to others.
The oil figure is a bit less meaningful, I think. Oil import are hugely fungible. The USA cutting back Middle East imports and pushing up imports from Canada, Mexico, Nigeria… doesn’t change the importance of Middle East oil to the USA in reality (the data might seem to suggest that but it is misleading due to the fungible nature of oil trading). Whether we get it directly from the Middle East or not our demand (and imports) creates more demand for Middle East oil. It is true the USA has greatly increased domestic production recently (and actually decreased the use of oil in 2009). So while I believe the data on Middle East oil I think that it is a bit misleading. If we had 0 direct imports from there we would still be greatly dependent on Middle East oil (because if France and China and India… were not getting their oil there they would buy it where we buy ours… Still the USA uses far more oil than any other country and is extremely dependent on imports. Several other countries are also extremely dependent on oil imports, including the next two top oil consuming countries: China, Japan.
Related: Oil Production by Country 1999-2009 – Government Debt as Percentage of GDP 1990-2009: USA, Japan, Germany, China… – Manufacturing Output as a Percent of GDP by Country – The Relative Economic Position of the USA is Likely to Decline
The economics of solar energy make sense today. The main stumbling block is financing the initial purchase (for homeowners, businesses or utilities). For new power generation solar is economically competitive in many locations today and prices continue to decline. One aspect that has harmed financing is the historical depreciation has been high (assuming a short lifespan of solar panels) but the panels now have much longer lifespans, meaning that when computing the return of solar investments you can expect a longer payback period. Combine that with falling prices and the economic case is great.
For a homeowner there is still the problem of financing what could be a $30,000 installation. Of course, the extremely low interest rates help here. First you have low cost capital (when calculating your return). Second, your alternative yields are very low (so it isn’t like you would earn 8% on your money just buying a CD). But for those that don’t want to take on the loan many companies are being formed to work on the financing for you (they deal with financing and then sell you the electricity they generate with panels on your home). It is a good business model I think. I personally think you are better off cutting out the intermediary and financing it yourself, but if you don’t want to, you can get cheaper electricity and help the environment.
In the USA there is a 30% federal tax credit for solar installation. Several states also offer tax credits for solar installation. There are also incentives in many other countries including Japan, Germany, Spain, Italy…
Where the U.S. Solar Industry Is Shining
…
Developers in the U.S. added 449.2 megawatts of solar-generating capacity in the third quarter of 2011, the latest data available, up 140 percent from the same quarter a year earlier.
…
SunRun hires local companies in 10 states to install solar arrays on customers’ roofs. The company charges clients for the electricity they generate— at monthly rates as much as 15 percent below those of regular utilities. Jurich says she expects SunRun to have a presence in 15 to 20 states within five years.
I own JinkoSolar stock which manufactures solar panels. This is based on the belief that solar has reached a point where it is a good way to generate electricity and we have huge needs for electrical power generation world wide.
Related: Top Countries For Renewable Energy Capacity – Global Wind Energy Capacity Exceeds 2.5% of Global Electricity Needs – Solar Energy: Economics, Government and Technology – Oil Consumption by Country 1990-2009
The national occupancy climbed 110 basis points during the year, and effective rents jumped 4.7% according MPF Research.
Occupancy rates increased to 94.6% at the end of 2011, up from 93.5% a year ago and from 91.8% when the occupancy rates bottomed in late 2009.
MPF Research predicts occupancy rates to increase another 50 basis points, and rents to rise 4.5%.
Northern California’s apartment markets ranked as the nation’s rent growth leaders during calendar 2011, despite the fact that some weakness registered in the performances recorded in parts of the Pacific Northwest specifically during the fourth quarter. Year-over-year, effective rents for new leases jumped 14.6% in San Francisco, 12.3% in San Jose, and 9% in Oakland. With rents down 0.4%, Las Vegas was the nation’s only major apartment market that lost pricing power during calendar 2011.
Rent Growth Leaders in Calendar 2011
| Rank | Metro Area | Annual Rent Growth |
| 1 | San Francisco | 14.6% |
| 2 | San Jose | 12.3% |
| 3 | Oakland | 9.0% |
| 4 | Boston | 8.3% |
| 5 | New York | 7.3% |
| 6 | Austin | 7.2% |
Related: Apartment Vacancies Fall to Lowest in 3 Years in the USA (April 2011) – Top USA Markets for Buying Rental Property – Apartment Rents Rise, Slightly, for First Time in 5 Quarters – It’s Now a Renter’s Market
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 243,000 in January, and the unemployment rate decreased to 8.3%, the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job growth was widespread in the private sector (which gained 257,000 jobs in the month), with large employment gains in professional and business services, leisure and hospitality, and manufacturing (which added an impressive 50,000 jobs). The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for November was revised from +100,000 to +157,000, and the change for December was revised from +200,000 to +203,000 which brings the total number of jobs gained with this report to 303,000, a very impressive figure.
This employment news is really starting to add up to something good. And this is going on while everyone is worrying about the Euro imploding. Quite remarkable really. Avoiding a much worse result from the too big-to-fail-financial-firms credit crisis is surprising. We are not close to through the mess that we created, but that it hasn’t been much worse is fairly amazing. And that things are going so well now (even with large unemployment problems) is impressive. The huge government debt balances are a very large concern but it wouldn’t be surprising to have those same huge debts and much worse present day conditions (which would add to the debts).
The unemployment rate declined to 8.3%; the rate has fallen by 80 basis point since August. The number of unemployed persons declined to 12.8 million in January. Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (7.7%) and blacks (13.6%) declined in January. The unemployment rates for adult women (7.7%), teenagers (23.2%), whites (7.4%), and Hispanics (10.5%) were little changed. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.7%.
The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 5.5 million and accounted for 42.9% of the unemployed. Long term unemployment remains a big problem. With a few more months with such strong growth in jobs and that could start to change.
After accounting for the annual adjustments to the population controls, the employment-population ratio (58.5%) rose in January, while the civilian labor force participation rate held at 63.7%.
Professional and business services continued to add jobs in January (+70,000). About half of the increase occurred in employment services (+33,000). Job gains also occurred in accounting and bookkeeping (+13,000) and in architectural and engineering services (+7,000).
Related: USA Adds 216,00 Jobs in March and the Unemployment Rate Stands at 8.8% (March 2011) – USA Unemployment Rate Remains at 9.7% (Feb 2010) – USA Unemployment Rate Rises to 8.1%, Highest Level Since 1983 (March 2009)
Total health expenditures in the USA in 2010 reached $2.6 trillion, $8,402 per person or 17.9% percent of GDP. All these are all time highs. Every year, for decades, health care costs have taken a larger and larger portion of the economic value created in the USA. The costs have risen much more rapidly than the costs in the rest of world. This creates a burden that slows the USA economy – it acts as a friction dragging everything else down. We not only need to slow down how fast we are getting worse (which we have done the last 2 years) but actually start making up for all the ground lost in the last few decades. We haven’t even started on that. The amount of work to do in getting our health system back to mediocre and reasonably priced is enormous (currently we have mediocre performance and extremely highly priced – twice as costly as other rich countries).
In 2009 the USA Spent Record $2.5 Trillion, $8,086 per person 17.6% of GDP on Medical Care.
USA health care spending grew 3.9% in 2010 following an increase of 3.8% in 2009. While those are the two slowest rates of growth in the 51 year history of the National Health Expenditure Accounts, they still outpaced both inflation and GDP growth. So yet again the health system expenses are taking a bigger portion of overall spending.
As a result of failing to address this issue for decades the problem is huge and will likely take decades to bring back just to a level where the burden on those in the USA, due to their broken health care system, is equal to the burden of other rich countries. Over 2 decades ago the failure in the health care system reached epidemic proportions but little has been done to deal with the systemic failures. Dr. Deming pointed to excessive health care cost, back then, as one of 7 deadly diseases facing American business. The fact that every year costs have increased more than GDP growth and outcome measures are no better than other rich countries shows the performance has been very poor. The disease is doing even more harm today.
Related: USA Heath Care System Needs Reform – USA Spends Record $2.3 trillion ($7,681 Per Person) on Health Care in 2008 – Systemic Health Care Failure: Small Business Coverage – Measuring the Health of Nations – How to improve the health care system performance – Management Improvement in Healthcare – USA Spent $2.2 Trillion, 16.2% of GDP, on Health Care in 2007
I decided to take a look at some historical economic data to see if some of my beliefs were accurate (largely about how well Singapore has done) and learn a bit more while I was at it.
| country |
|
1970** |
|
2010*** |
|
% increase |
| Korea | 1,320 | 20,200 | 1,430 | |||
| China | 325 | 4,280 | 1,217 | |||
| Singapore | 4260 | 42,650 | 901 | |||
| Indonesia | 460 | 2,960 | 543 | |||
| Brazil | 1900 | 10,500 | 453 | |||
| Thailand | 850 | 4,600 | 441 | |||
| Portugal | 3,970 | 21,000 | 429 | |||
| Japan | 9,000 | 42,300 | 370 | |||
| Malaysia | 1,900 | 7,755 | 308 | |||
| Germany | 11,550 | 40,500 | 251 | |||
| UK | 10,400 | 36,300 | 249 | |||
| France | 13,600 | 40,600 | 199 | |||
| Mexico | 4,160 | 9,200 | 121 | |||
| Panama | 3,480 | 7,700 | 121 | |||
| India | 555 | 1,180 | 113 | |||
| USA | 23,350 | 47,100 | 102 | |||
| South Africa | 3,930 | 7,100 | 81 | |||
| Venezuela | 8,280 | 9,770 | 18 |
I just picked countries that interested me and seemed worth looking at. I looked for some around the starting position of Singapore and close to Singapore geographically. And looked at Panama as the closest match to Singapore (for Singapore’s main 1970 asset, convenient for shipping lanes, and very close for GDP per capita).
Malaysia and Singapore were 1 country after independence (from 1963-1965).
I can’t imagine more than a couple countries could reasonably be argued to have had better economic performance from 1970 to 2010 than Singapore (Korea? China? Who else?). Singapore had very little going for it in 1970. They had a good location for shipping and that is about it macro-economically. No natural resources. No huge storage of wealth. No preeminence in science, technology or business.
It seems to me that Singapore actually did have 1 other thing. A government that was to preside over a fantastic economic growth success. You won’t find many textbooks talking about the way to economic success is a very well run government. And there is good reason for that, I believe. Relying on a very well run government will nearly always fail. In some ways Singapore was like Japan but with significantly more government influence on the way economic development played out.
I was surprised how poorly the USA has faired. It isn’t so surprising that we lagged. People forget how rich the USA was in 1970. The USA is still very rich but bunched together with lots of other rich countries instead of way out ahead as they were in 1970. And in 1970 the lead was already contracting, for what it had been earlier. But even knowing the relative performance of the USA had lagged, I was surprised by how much it under-performed.
I was also surprised with India. I knew they have done poorly but I didn’t realize it had been this poor. The failures to greatly improve infrastructure, education and the stifling effect of their bureaucracy have been causing them great harm. They have been doing some good things in the last 10 years especially but still have a long way to go. Their premier education is actually pretty decent. The problem is the other 90% of the education is often poor and many people (especially women) hardly have any education at all. It is very hard to get ahead when you fail to take advantage of the talents of so many of your people.
Related: Singapore and Iskandar Malaysia – Chart of Largest Petroleum Consuming Countries from 1980 to 2010 – Chart of Nuclear Power Production by Country from 1985-2009 – Top Countries For Renewable Energy Capacity
Chart of manufacturing production by the top 10 manufacturing countries (2000 to 2010). The chart was created by the Curious Cat Economics Blog. You may use the chart with attribution. All data is shown in 2010 USD (United States Dollar).
In my last post I looked at the output of the top 10 manufacturing countries with a focus on 1980 to 2010. Here I take a closer look at the last 10 years.
In 2010, China took the lead as the world’s leading manufacturing country from the USA. In 1995 the USA was actually very close to losing the lead to Japan (though you wouldn’t think it looking at the recent data). I believe China will be different, I believe China is going to build on their lead. As I discussed in the last post the data doesn’t support any decline in Chinese manufacturing (or significant moves away from China toward other South-East Asian countries). Indonesia has grown quickly (and have the most manufacturing production, of those discussed), but their total manufacturing output is less than China grew by per year for the last 5 years.
The four largest countries are pretty solidly in their positions now: the order will likely be China, USA, Japan, Germany for 10 years (or longer): though I could always be surprised. In the last decade China relentlessly moved past the other 3, to move from 4th to 1st. Other than that though, those 3 only strengthened their position against their nearest competitors. Brazil, Korea or India would need to increase production quite rapidly to catch Germany sooner. After the first 4 though the situation is very fluid.
Taking a closure look at the large group of countries after top 4. Chart of manufacturing production from 2000-2010.
Chart of manufacturing production by the leading manufacturing countries (2000 to 2010). The top 4 countries are left off to look more closely at history of the next group. The chart was created by the Curious Cat Economics Blog based on UN data. You may use the chart with attribution.
Removing the top 4 to take a close look at the data on the other largest manufacturing countries we see that there are many countries bunched together. It is still hard to see, but if you look closely, you can make out that some countries are growing well, for example: Brazil, India and Indonesia. Other countries (most in Europe, as well as Mexico) did not fare well in the last decade.
The UK had a particularly bad decade, moving from first place in this group (5th in the world) to 5th in this group and likely to be passed by India in 2011. Europe has 4 countries in this list (if you exclude Russia) and they do not appear likely to do particularly well in the next decade, in my opinion. I would certainly expect Brazil, India, Korea and Indonesia to out produce Italy, France, UK and Spain in 2020. In 2010 the total was $976 billion by the European 4 to $961 billion by the non-European 4. In 2000 it was $718 billion for the European 4 to $343 billion (remember all the data is in 2010 USD).