Chemical and Metal Shortage Alert – November 2020

The purpose of this blog is to identify chemical and metal shortages reported on the Internet.  The sources of the information reported here are primarily news releases issued on the Internet.  The issue period of the news releases is November 2020. 

Section I below lists those chemicals and metals that were on the previous month’s Chemical and Metal Shortage Alert list and continue to have news releases indicating they are in short supply.   Click here to read the October 2020 Chemical and Metal Shortage Alert list. 

Section II lists the new chemicals and metals (not on the October alert).  Also provided is some explanation for the shortage and geographical information.  This blog attempts to list only actual shortage situations – those shortages that are being experienced during the period covered by the news releases.  Chemicals and metals identified in news releases as only being in danger of being in shortage status are not listed. 

Section I.   

• Aluminum cans:  United States; supply not keeping up with demand
• Building materials:  global; supply not keeping up with demand
• Coronavirus protective and testing equipment:  global; supply not keeping up with demand
• Lumber: United States and Canada; production not keeping up with demand
• Scrap steel:  Asia; supply not keeping up with demand
• Steel:  United States, South Africa; production not keeping up with demand 

Section II.   Shortages Reported in November not found on the Previous Month’s List 

• Carbon dioxide:  United States; production not keeping up with demand
• Carbonic acid:  South Korea; insufficient imports
• Copper:  global; mining not keeping up with demand
• Corrugated cardboard/fiberboard:  South Korea; supply not keeping up with demand
• Shipping containers:  global; supply not keeping up demand
• Solar module materials (polysilicon, solar glass):  global; production not keeping up with demand
• Toluene:  India; supply not keeping up with demand
• Waste paper:  India; supply not keeping up with demand 

Reasons for Section II shortages can be broadly categorized as:  

• Mining not keeping up with demand: copper
• Production not keeping up with demand: carbon dioxide; solar module materials  (polysilicon, solar glass)
• Government regulations: none
• Sources no longer available: none
• Insufficient imports:  carbonic acid
• Supply not keeping up with demand:  corrugated cardboard/fiberboard; shipping containers; toluene; waste paper

Commercialized Electroactive Polymers

Electroactive polymers (EAPs) change size and/or shape when stimulated by an electric field.   EAPs have been researched for many years trying to develop their uses in commercial applications. You can read more about EAP technologies and their potential applications by clicking here (paper written by scientists at the University of Pittsburgh).  The research and development efforts are leading to success.   I have researched the Internet extensively to find company websites where EAPs are being offered as company products. 

The following identify companies that I found that offer EAP products (categorized by application).  Links to information on those products are also provided. 

actuators 

• Leap Technology (click here for product details)
• Novasentis (click here for product details)
• Solchroma  (click here for product details)
• Wacker (click here for product details) 

sensors 

• Leap Technology  (click here for product details)
• Parker Hannifin (click here for product details)
• Solvay  (click here for product details)
• Wacker  (click here for product details) 

robots 

• Environmental Robots (click here for product details) 

textiles 

• Weafing (click here for product details) 

Marketing data found on the Internet suggests that sales of EAPs in 2019 generated revenues in the $4 billion range.  And the compounded annual growth rate (cagr) going forward is estimated to be around 7%.

  

Chemical and Metal Shortage Alert – October 2020

The purpose of this blog is to identify chemical and metal shortages reported on the Internet.  The sources of the information reported here are primarily news releases issued on the Internet.  The issue period of the news releases is October 2020. 

Section I below lists those chemicals and metals that were on the previous month’s Chemical and Metal Shortage Alert list and continue to have news releases indicating they are in short supply. Click here to read the September 2020 Chemical and Metal Shortage Alert list.

 Section II lists the new chemicals and metals (not on the September alert).  Also provided is some explanation for the shortage and geographical information.  This blog attempts to list only actual shortage situations – those shortages that are being experienced during the period covered by the news releases.  Chemicals and metals identified in news releases as only being in danger of being in short supply status are not listed. 

Section I.   

• Aluminum cans: United States; supply not keeping up with demand
• Coronavirus protective and testing equipment:  United States; supply not keeping up with demand
• Lumber: United States and Canada; production not keeping up with demand
• Scrap titanium: global; supply not keeping up with demand 

Section II.   Shortages Reported in October not found on the Previous Month’s List 

• Building materials:  United States, United Kingdom, and Ireland; supply not keeping up with demand
• Isocyanates:  Europe; production not keeping up with demand
• Monoethylene glycol (MEG): Latin America; production not keeping up with demand
• Polyols: Europe; production not keeping up with demand
• Scrap steel: Asia; supply not keeping up with demand
• Steel:  India; supply not keeping up with demand 

Reasons for Section II shortages can be broadly categorized as:  

• Mining not keeping up with demand: none
• Production not keeping up with demand: isocyanates; monoethylene glycol (MEG); polyols
• Government regulations: none
• Sources no longer available: none
• Insufficient imports:  none
• Supply not keeping up with demand: building materials; scrap steel; steel

Commercialization of Perovskite Solar Cells

The Swedish construction company Skanska is evaluating the use of perovskite solar cells (PSCs), manufactured by the Polish company Saule Technologies, in its construction projects.  Read more about this evaluation by going to these Skanska websites (click here and here). 

Potential commercialization of PSCs seem to have taken a substantial step forward in the current period, due likely to developments substantially advancing successes in PSCs’ use in generating electricity.   Other PSCs developers, besides Saule, such as the British company Oxford PV, the Chinese company Microquanta Semiconductor, and  the Japanese company Sekisui, are targeting near-term commercialization (in the next year of two) by experimenting with pilot production facilities and field testing of PSCs withstanding of adverse conditions. 

My reading of current Internet information on PSC commercialization is that it is very unlikely that PSCs will replace silicon solar cells anytime soon, if ever, on roof tops and in solar panel farms.   However, because PSCs have characteristics such as being a flexible film and relatively easy and cheap to make, architects, designers, and contractors are likely to find excellent, productive ways of using them in and around homes, offices, and other buildings.   Information at the Skanska websites (links given above) providing how Skanska is planning to use PSCs gives credence to this reading.

  

Chemical Company Financial Data and Correlations Between the Data

The table below shows eleven sets of performance data for thirty-one chemical companies.  

Price is a recent share price.  p/e is share price divided by share earnings.  % yield is the dividend yield.  The price/cash column shows how much an investor is paying for an additional dollar of cash flow.   Lower values are better for the investor.  Roe, gpm, and npm stand for return on equity (roe), gross profit margin (gpm), and net profit margin (npm).  LT debt/eqty% is the company’s long term (LT) debt as percentage of the company equity.  This measurement reflects debt burden – the higher the value, the higher the debt burden.  Sales/empl is the sales revenue per employee (in millions).  This value can indicate companies operating more efficiently when values are higher.  Shares are the number of company shares (in billions).  And revs is the company’s sales revenues (in billions). 

company	price	p/e	% yield	price /cash	roe	gpm	npm	LT debt /eqty %	sales/ empl in million $	shares in billion	revs in billion $
basf	15.7	48.8	5.95	7.36	2.61	25.7	1.9	44	0.572	3.67	66.5
Dow	49.9	-	5.86	29.92	-13	13.2	-4.92	130	1.1	0.741	43
LyondellBasell Industries	78.3	12.7	5.45	5.45	22.5	13	6.81	186	1.6	0.336	34.7
Linde	232	55.4	1.65	17.92	4.71	42.2	8.3	24	0.34	0.525	28.2
DuPont	59.9	-	2.03	31.31	-6.6	34.5	-12.5	42	0.591	0.734	21.5
Nutrien	40.7	27.8	4.48	8.19	3.58	25.6	4.06	48	1.2	0.569	20
Braskem	8.35	-	5.39	23.94	-	12	-20.9	-	-	0.172	15.5
PPG Industries	137	29.6	1.61	17.81	-	4.76	7.87	-	0.289	0.236	15.1
Ecolab	204	45.5	0.92	22.92	18.6	42.1	9.96	115	0.266	0.285	14.9
Corteva	33.6	53.8	1.55	18.88	1.86	40.1	3.4	4	0.669	0.749	13.8
Mitsui Chemicals	12.1	22.1	3.79	5.45	4.31	21.6	2.35	63	0.647	0.196	12.7
DSM	42.2	41.1	1.63	20.82	8.26	-	7.45	48	0.474	0.69	10.1
Eastman Chemical	87.2	20.6	3.05	8.53	9.71	23.3	6.72	90	0.6	0.135	9.3
Mosaic	19.2	-	1.04	-	-12	7.6	-12.1	53	0.688	0.379	8.9
Air Products & Chemicals	296	34.6	1.8	22.87	16.6	34.4	22.33	63	0.506	0.221	8.9
Westlake Chemical	71	23.2	1.54	7.6	6.68	14.1	5.69	63	0.805	0.128	8.1
Tosoh	16.9	12.6	3.56	5.92	8.13	24.3	6.37	5	0.523	0.318	7.4
Huntsman	24.6	73.5	2.63	7.81	2.76	17.8	1.63	48	0.618	0.221	6.8
Celanese	119	22.5	2.06	11.64	24.1	23.3	11.51	120	0.735	0.118	6.3
Olin	18.1	-	4.53	4.76	-9.4	6.96	-4.14	186	0.866	0.158	6.1
Chemours	23.1	-	4.41	14.39	-16	18.3	-2.28	659	0.734	0.164	5.5
FMC	108	25.6	1.63	20.15	19.7	44.9	11.93	107	0.721	0.13	4.6
CF Industires	28.9	16.6	4.16	4.06	12.7	23.3	12.13	138	1.42	0.214	4.6
Albemarle	94.6	22.5	1.66	14.3	11.2	33.3	11.6	78	0.563	0.106	3.6
Cabot	41.1	39.8	3.42	6.99	5.84	19.5	2.73	125	0.618	0.565	3.3
Ashland	74.7	-	1.49	13.08	-15	31.8	-20	51	0.495	0.065	2.5
WR Grace	46.8	51.1	2.61	13.42	16.6	37.2	3.21	577	0.454	0.066	2
Stepan	115	23.7	0.97	13.97	12.7	18.8	7.81	21	0.791	0.022	1.9
Kraton	31	4.87	-	4.97	22	24	12.27	93	0.841	0.032	1.8
Mineral Technologies	58.2	16.7	0.35	8.45	8.58	24.9	7.24	46	0.459	0.034	1.8
Kronos Worldwide	14.2	22.6	5.05	12.18	8.73	21.7	4.51	56	0.735	0.116	1.7
average		31.1	2.9	13.5	6.2	24.1	3.3	113	0.697	0.390	12.6

Perhaps the most valuable data in the table above are the averages for each data set.   These averages could serve as good benchmarks in comparing a chemical company to its peers.

From the data in the columns above, I used Excel to compute correlation values between each data set.  Presented here are the correlations between all possible pairs of data.  Red indicates negative correlations.

between share price and:			between p/e and:			between % yield and:			between price/cash and:
p/e	15%		% yield	-15%		price/ cash	-21%		roe	-20%
% yield	-48%		price/cash	40%		roe	-19%		gpm	33%
price/ cash	39%		roe	-44%		gpm	-39%		npm	-23%
roe	38%		gpm	34%		npm	-24%		LT debt/ eqty %	-2%
gpm	44%		npm	-34%		LT debt/ eqty %	25%		sales/ empl	-33%
npm	50%		LT debt/eqty %	11%		sales/ empl	59%		shares	2%
LT debt/ eqty %	-14%		sales/empl	-44%		shares	37%		revs	19%
sales/ empl	-34%		shares	34%		revs	50%
shares	-16%		revs	26%
revs	1%

 

between roe and:			between gpm and:			between npm and:
gpm	33%		npm	31%		LT debt/ eqty %	-9%
npm	83%		LT debt/ eqty %	-6%		sales/ empl	1%
LT debt/ eqty %	-11%		sales/ empl	-37%		shares	-9%
sales/ empl	-17%		shares	6%		revs	-13%
shares	-17%		revs	-5%
revs	-17%

It is interesting that a company’s stock sales price show a 50% correlation with net profit margin.  Also return of equity shows a very high 83% correlation with net profit margin.   This suggests the value of net profit margin as a measurement for good company financial performance, which is not surprising.