Group items tagged

This enabled the company to increase its cash and bank balance from about Rs 45,000 crore during 2010-11 to Rs 62,000 crore in 2012-13,

Most of the additional reserves came from higher prices as production did not rise at the same pace. This fiscal year, the company is likely to miss its target on coal production by about 17 million tonnes and sales by some 15 million tonnes.

Power tariffs are regulated by Central and state regulatory commissions, however, coal prices are not. Every increase in coal prices leads to increased power generation costs which need to be passed on to consumers.

"SEEA's unique analytical approach has yielded valuable insights into how investments in energy efficiency and conservation can also create jobs and other tangible benefits, even in regions that have historically shown little commitment to energy efficiency,"

"It takes a great deal of energy to supply water, and a great deal of water to supply energy. With water stress spreading and intensifying around the globe, it's critical that policymakers not promote water-intensive energy options."

Fellow

IEA sees coal-powered electricity driving the greatest demand for water now and in the future

Steam-driven coal plants always have required large amounts of water

The postal service was privatised in October 2013.

Richard Hunter, head of equities at Hargreaves Lansdown Stockbrokers, said the update was "perfectly acceptable".

She said the company's European parcels business was doing well after exploiting "growth opportunities in the eurozone". Letter revenue fell by 3% on a like-for-like basis, the company said, as the impact of London 2012 collectable stamp sales waned.

Shares in Royal Mail closed down 2.6% at 572.5p, against a flotation price in October of 330p-a-share.

Mr Hunter said Royal Mail's shares had had a "very strong run" since October but that it may struggle to make "further meaningful progress" in the shorter term. The company was "simply a hold" for investors, he said.

The propane industry has set its sights on that symbol of American middle-class achievement: the lawn mower

Blame it in part on the natural-gas drilling boom, which has left distributors scrambling to find new ways to increase demand for propane

By promoting the benefits of propane lawn mowers—which have lower emissions, are cheaper to run and last longer—the group is betting it can grow to a 3% share of all commercial mowers sold in the U.S. by 2016 from 1% now. That would goose propane consumption by the machines to 23.8 million gallons by 2016 from about 7.9 million gallons this year.

How much the push into lawn mowers will help propane retailers remains to be seen.

In addition, the U.S. has become a net exporter of propane in recent years—supplying countries such as Mexico, Brazil, Ecuador and Chile with propane for residential heating and cooking

Surprisingly, a carbon tax would operate much like a diamond tax, for reasons both of demand and supply.

Demand: The wealthy actually consume a disproportionate amount of carbon. Discussions of a carbon tax usually focus on the price of gasoline. One gallon of gas produces about 17 pounds of CO2. One metric ton is 2,204 pounds. So a $100 tax on a ton of CO2 comes to $0.77 per gallon -- a significant cost to low-income commuters and small truckers.

But the very poor don't drive or travel or occupy much space; the rich fly planes, including private jets; drive to low-density suburbs; occupy and heat multiple houses and hotels; and buy lots of stuff. Clearly the rich consume much more carbon per capita than the poor.

Demand elasticity for oil is low, about 0.5; so a 1 percent increase in oil price would cause a 0.5 percent decrease in consumption. That makes sense, since in the short run, it's hard for people to cut energy consumption, especially if they must drive to work. But, though numbers are hard to come by, elasticity of supply is much, much lower, for two reasons. First, oil production takes decades and billions in capital investment; producers cannot quickly increase or decrease supply. Second, oil producers form an international cartel, an organized mega-monopoly, which holds down production to drive up prices. Since they're already charging what the traffic will bear, they can't much raise prices to cover a tax.

As economists long ago figured out, buyers and sellers share a tax in inverse proportion to elasticity. Therefore, if supply elasticity of carbon is, say, 0.1, while demand elasticity is 0.5, the suppliers will pay five times as much of the tax as consumers. That reduces that $0.77 per gallon gas tax to only $0.13. Moreover, precisely because most of the tax falls on suppliers, it will generate plenty of revenue to help those unfortunate long-distance commuters and small truckers, to build more public transportation, to invest in renewable energy, and even to cut super-regressive taxes like the payroll tax.

According to Edward Wolff, in 2007, the top 1 percent in the U.S. owned 43 percent of non-home wealth, mostly securities, including of course energy company stocks and bonds. The top 10 percent of wealth holders owned 83 percent.

A May 2013 federal study of the Social Cost of Carbon estimated costs of additional CO2 emissions for 2010 to 2050 ranging from $27 to $221 per metric ton in 2050, depending on assumptions.

So we have good news and bad news. Good news: The cost of reducing carbon emissions will fall hardest on the 1 percent, who consume the most energy and own the energy companies. Bad news: Ditto. Expect a fight!

the employment minister, will launch a significant government push on welfare this week by saying that unemployed people must prepare for their first interview with a Jobcentre Plus adviser by preparing a CV.

McVey will highlight tough new rules for newly unemployed people. She will say: "With the economy growing, unemployment falling and record numbers of people in work, now is the time to start expecting more of people if they want to claim benefits.

"This is about treating people like adults and setting out clearly what is expected of them so they can hit the ground running.

In return, we will give people as much help and support as possible to move off benefits and into work because we know from employers that it's the people who are prepared and enthusiastic who are most likely to get the job.

the US will maintain this new standing for the foreseeable future, according to official projections.

It should be no surprise, then, that in the past rising oil prices were associated with recessions and falling oil prices with booms. If the oil price carries on falling back towards $50 a barrel, and if history is any guide, the western economy should respond – to the good.

But although particular companies may lose out, the first-round effect of this fall should provide good news. High oil prices depress economic activity. They suck money from consumer spending and redirect it to oil-exporting countries, which typically hoard it in elephantine foreign exchange reserves or unspent  bank deposits. It is a tax by the few on the many.

With the US needing to buy less oil on international markets and China’s growth sinking to its lowest mark for 40 years, there is now, amazingly, the prospect of an oil glut. The oil price instantly nosedived to its lowest level for four years, around $70 a barrel – down more than a third in three months.

Suddenly, the balance of economic advantage with Russia, no less dependent on oil and gas exports, will flip. Russia’s 2014 budget was based on an oil price of $100 a barrel. At $70 a barrel, the economy will contract by at least 3% in 2015, the country will run a balance of payments deficit and the government’s finances will spin out of control.

The chances of Russia sustaining a surrogate war in Ukraine have suddenly been reduced. All good news.

But western governments cannot hope that economic benefits will arrive automatically. These are new times.

Uncertainty and fear abound. Interest rates in Britain alone have been pegged at 0.5% for more than five years. But still business is reluctant to invest, not knowing what technologies to back or not knowing how much demand there will be for new products and services. We live in an era of stagnation, “secular stagnation”

So falling oil prices offer the world economy a great opportunity. But if it is not leapt upon purposefully by aggressively expansionary economic policy, secular stagnation might worsen.