It seems weird when a company with more resources of a particular commodity isn't valued higher by the stock market (compare, for example Seabridge Gold or Northgate Minerals to Detour Gold; Cenovus Energy (oil) to Anadarko Petroleum). When companies aren't producing (such as the case with many big exploration companies) people are more skeptical of their estimates, especially if they don't have the financing in place to turn projects into operations; Ivanhoe Mines suffered from that for years before Rio Tinto confirmed the company's standing by calling Oyu Tolgoi 'the biggest copper resource in the world'. Examples of companies that have gotten away with lieing about resources include Greywolf Resources, a group of companies in Argentina which the president claimed in 2004, lied about reserves, even Shell has been caught but that was at a time when regulations industry-wide, were softer.
Furthermore, energy consumption experienced the biggest yearly increase since 1973 in 2010, in 2010 it was up 5.6% largely due to China (up 11.2% surpassing the USA) and non-OECD nations (63% higher than 2000 levels). (World energy consumption up 5.6% in 2010, biggest rise since 1973: BP) Brazil, for example was on pace to import 50% more gasoline in 2011 than in 2010 (3.2M barrels Jan-Aug compared to 3.2M barrels Jan-Dec accounting for 5% of domestic fuel needs). In 2010 90% of cars sold in Brazil run on a combination of bio-fuel and gasoline but bio-fuel is getting more expensive: Sugar cane price is up 85% over the last year.
(Brazil boom takes world fuel markets by surprise)
Here are three companies that I think would benefit from more investment and media exposure.
Meg Energy -
Recoverable oil resource is close to 6 billion barrels. That's almost as much as Canada's biggest petroleum companies Suncor (7-8 billion, with a market value of over US$50 billion), and Canadian Natural Resources (over 6 billion, MV is over US$40 billion). Being heavy oil doesn't really make a difference anymore as synthetic oil is easier to produce and more widely used than it used to be (though oil prices need to be at least $50/bbl for it to be economically viable to produce but I don't think that level will be breached anytime soon).
Phase 2B of the Christina Lake project has costs totaling $1.4 billion (about the same as MEG's total cash and cash equivalents) that will be spent in 2011. The biggest phase of the project (will increase production by 250,000 barrels per day or 7X more than what phase 2B will produce) is the third phase. You can imagine the price tag there, receiving regulatory approval shouldn't be a problem but more investment will probably be needed. The company recently reached $10 billion in market value and
China's third biggest oil company has already invested in it so attracting more shouldn't be difficult, but when it's announced, individual investors could show a lot more interest. Update:
In October 2011 JP Morgan, the world's #1 bank in terms of revenue, forecast oil at $121/barrel by 2013, at the same time it expects oil prodction that year to rise by about 2M bbls/d to 91 million barrels a day.
By 2045 oil sands will produce close to 11M bbls/d and that will continue for a century. Between 2012 and 2020 oil output from the tar sands will double (1.7 mbpd --> 3.4 mbpd) and
triple in the next 25 years to 5.1 million barrels per day. Tar sands crude is over five times more expensive to extract than middle east oil however with oil prices up more than 400% since 2001 and Alberta continuing to charge one of the lowest royalty rates in the world (fell from $3 to $2/bbl between 2001 and 2009) there is much profit to be made.
Bankers Petroleum - Has interest in Europe's largest onshore oil field (7.5 billion barrels in place). 2P reserves are over 268 million barrels and rising fast (proved reserves up 30% in 2010), including stakes held