life is ..............dont scare,i am not a philosopher who will tell you believe in positive attitude or will say u that it is a rough pitch.i waana tell u that take the life as it comes,expect some unexpected thing in life and march on.
On February 27, 2009 Ministry of Coal has awarded 2 coal blocks in Orissa for CTL projects to SETCL and JSPL. The IMG (Inter Ministerial Group) has however selected these two bidders taking all the criteria but has never given any clear order of preference.
Of late, Govt wanted to award these coal blocks on the basis of profit sharing and has sought legal advice from the law ministry. The law ministry clearly said that these criteria can not be a part of the contract document as this is proposed after the last date of application. Though the govt asked for profit sharing clause later at a stage of making presentation before the IMG, the law ministry advised the Ministry of coal to call for fresh proposals if it wants to introduce profit sharing as one of the clause for coal block allocation.
But, calling for fresh proposal would have definitely taken some time and fresh controversies would have been surfaced .Looking at these issues, Govt did not prefer to have fresh bidding on CTL.
Before awarding CTL blocks, Govt did have some options.
a.One of the options was to hold back on CTL allocation as the economics do not favour a CTL coal block allocation at this juncture. The world economy is passing through a phrase of slow down and the oil is well below the price of economic production of oil from CTL projects ( around $80 as predicted by the experts).The other concern is that if the project is delayed and the amendments to MMDR act is passed in favour of competitive bidding of the coal blocks , then the whole exercise will have been repeated .
b.The second option was that one party can be allocated coal block for development. As IMG has not set any preference, it is argued that the other party might raise some concerns about the allocation. Single allocation in favour of a party could have been made after a consensus from the competent authority.
c.The third option was to allocate two blocks to two short listed parties as their first choice differs from each other. . SETSL have indicated their first preference for the North of Arkhapal-Srirampur block, whereas JSPL have indicated their first preference for the Ramchandi Promotional block.
d.The last option was to return the proposal to IMG for a further fine tuning of parties so as to make a final decision on allocation of one coal block to one party. It would have taken some more time but could have been the right solution .
But the government took the third option to allocate two coal blocks to two parties.
It raises serious concerns on the part of the government. The timing of the decision (when the elections are only 2 months far away) and the basis of allocation. As everyone knows that CTL project is at a very nascent stage of development and the technology is not well established besides few successful demonstrations in South Africa. The quality of Indian coal and its accessibility to the technology proposed is still under development phase. What could be the reason behind to allocate 2 coal blocks. By doing this government unnecessarily blocked 2 huge coal resources for a project whose veracity is not well established till yet.
Though government has made strict provisions that coal from the project will be used strictly for CTL and can not be diverted, but then the decision to allocate the coal blocks certainly comes under scrutiny.
No doubt, the project developers have to bear all risks involved but when it is explicitly mentioned that one coal block will be allocated to one project developer, to award 2 coal blocks is not a wise decision. As the resources are limited, the country needs to take right decision at the right time but the decision to allocate these coal blocks in a hurry significantly points towards some under the carpet theory which could not be ignored.
What is your opinion on this issue? Please contribute
According to Gadgil formula, for any central power project, the home state gets 10% as preferential allocation, 15% is kept unallocated at the disposal of the Centre and the balance 75% is allocated to beneficiary states, including the home state, on the basis of their energy consumption and central plan allocation during the previous five years.
Thus, for any power project NTPC could offer upto 30% of power for any hosting state, where as ultra mega power projects being developed by Reliance Power (Sasan) and Tata Power (Mundra) have made higher allocation of 37.5% and 47.5%, respectively, to the home states.
NTPC has proposed a revision in the existing method so as to allocate more power to create a level playing field with private generators. It would help NTPC getting green field power projects from states. If the proposal is approved, NTPC can offer 45% of the power generated to the host state.
The states are demanding more power allocation in lieu of fuel linkage, land acquisition and water linkage etc. But, the big question is, should NTPC be allowed to offer more allocation to the host state of the power plants?
States are demanding more power quota so as to trade and earn huge revenue out of it. It is not that states want this power to mitigate any deficit situation of power. Trading of power could earn them above Rs 10 in peak demand seasons. Even when the host state needs power for its peak shortages, it resorts to load shedding and in the same time it sells power to other states at a higher rate so as to fill its revenue kitty. This happens in case of hilly states and states where hydel projects are situated. The allocated quota for the states is used for trading.
In my opinion, NTPC being a central government company should not do this so as to beg projects. It will definitely create an imbalance situation for different regions in India. Even state governments are accusing the central government for partiality in case of distribution of unallocated quotas of power from the central generating stations. Central govt. is being accused of providing more power to the state where its party is in power and neglects the other states.
If UMPP is taken into consideration or otherwise any such coal pit head projects, it is known that coal fields are basically situated in eastern states ( Jharkhand, Orissa,WB,Chhatisgarh etc) where the demand for power is comparatively low. If projects have to come up at the eastern states because of its proximity to coal fields, then the states having coal fields will have surplus power and the northern region will be power deficit as most of the demand comes from these states. It will create a situation where in the spot prices of power would move up in peaking time and it is bound to create regional imbalances .
At best NTPC should find options to enter into JVs with state generating companies so as to develop power plants in the state with equity participation from state and central utilities.
Power ministry is currently mulling over the idea to allow NTPC to offer more power to the host state. But, rather doing any good to the country, it would bring more harm to the central government. It is a fact that NTPC is well behind the private developers when it comes to UMPP projects, but NTPC should look inside and try to rectify the system which holds it back to offer good prices when it is having all advantages of expertise, experience and the backing of central governments at large.
What is your opinion on this issue, please contribute.
Captive is a bad word but a good option at least in the coal production. Though 198 coal blocks of reserves over 40 billion tones were allocated till now, production could only commence from 25 blocks. The share of coal production is still below 10% of the total coal produced in the country. Problems are aplenty for coal production through captive blocks and solutions few but the road ahead is slowly and steadily emerging.
Even a 100 percent FDI in captive coal failed to provide the right incentives for players to ramp up the production. It clearly shows a lack of seriousness and inability in case of captive miners. What could be the way forward to resolve all the challenges faced by captive coal miners? Is there any scope of changing the policies? How could be the captive mining be incentivised so as to attract serious players in the field.
The government should be flexible enough to change rules and regulations so as to allot explored blocks to captive developers. Government takes first initiative allowing power companies to use surplus coal available to similar end use project of same company as in case of Sasan UMPP. The earlier norms was to transfer the excess coal to CIL.
Even the identified explored blocks which are retained by CIL to be mined in 12th plan and onwards must be awarded to private developers for captive development as the gap between demand and supply is growing at an alarming scale. India should take aggressive steps to address this issue and it might probably one of alternative solution to address coal issues in India.
The option of competitive bidding for coal blocks should be explored and be made project specific like in case for UMPP in power. All the power projects which will be awarded on the basis of competitive bidding must be allocated coal blocks in advance so as to make the project more viable by taking away the fuel risk component. The method of allocating coal quota should be discarded and some portion of coal produced from the captive coal should be set aside for merchant sell through e auctioning. It will attract serious private developers towards developing the coal blocks which otherwise would have taken more tome to develop.
Monitoring process should be made stringent and huge penalty may be levied on non serious developers. Most importantly government should first identify, explore the coal blocks and facilitate in acquiring all approvals in place before awarding any coal block for captive development. This will definitely reduce the time line of coal block development for at least 24 to 30 months.
Though India looks for massive coal import option to mitigate the coal crisis in future, it would be better if it reforms the coal sector and mend certain acts so as to open up the coal sector for a better market discovery. Some amount of captive coal should be allowed for merchant sale so as to attract serious and big players to chip in and discover the huge opportunities lying untapped beneath the ground.
It is indeed very sad and unfortunate that the IPL will be shifted outside India.What is more troublesome is that the signal it sends to overseas..( India is not safe ). It is clear that IPL organisers can do anything for money at the stake of India's own pride. It is a fact that BCCI is a money vending machine.Had India out of Cricket world, the dooms day would be very near for the other cricketing nations.
It is definitely not a political issue but surely a national one.What could congress do at the time of election. The IPL match schedule clash with the elections. It is the top most priority of the government to provide security to the citizens first and definitely not for an entairtainment private business ( T20 cricket). The states refused to take an extra lliability to arrange for security for IPL matches.India is not having enough security personnels to take guard of these so called VIPs ( cricket players). Government is very right when it expressed its inability to provide security.
But then, BJP is striking the right cord when it says that IPL shifting is not in favour of the nation as it sends a wrong signal to the international community while very shortly we are going to organise the common wealth games. It would be bad for the tourism sector too. But, before pointing figure at the congress to take some mileage on the political front, BJP should point the finger at BCCI and try to pursuade them not to shift base for IPL. IPL can wait for some time but the pride of nation does not.
Now, its high time for we Indians to take a decision. It is we whom the organisers take as granted as they know that cricket is an alternate religion to all of us.So, they play with our emotions.All these hue and cry will not affect the organisers as lots of money is at stake for them and anyhow they will stick to their schedule. Even if the world is not safe, they would better find a option to organise at the moon..ha ha..
So, friends..arise and awake and stop not till the IPL shifting ends. IPL is truly an international domestic event and in no way, it should shift its base from India.
In spite of being such a colourful festival, there are various aspects of Holi which makes it so significant for our lives. Though they might not be so apparent but a closer look and a little thought will reveal the significance of Holi in more ways than meets the eyes. Ranging from socio-cultural, religious to biological there is every reason why we must heartily enjoy the festival and cherish the reasons for its celebrations. So when, its time for Holi, please don't hold yourself back and enjoy the festival to the hilt by participating with full enthusiasm in every small tradition related to the festival.
Mythological Significance Holi gets us close to our religion and our mythology as it is essentially the celebration of various legends associated with the festival. Foremost is the legend ofPrahlad and Hiranyakshyap. The legend says there once lived a devil and powerful king, Hiranyakshyap who considered himself a god and wanted everybody to worship him. To his great ire, his son, Prahlad began to worship, Lord Vishnu. To get rid of his son, Hiranyakshyap asked his sister, Holika to enter a blazing fire with Prahlad in her lap, as she had a boon to enter fire unscathed. Legend has it that Prahlad was saved for his extreme devotion for the lord while Holika paid a price for her sinister desire. The tradition of burning Holika or the 'Holika dahan' comes mainly from this legend.
Holi also celebrates the legend of Radha and Krishna which describes the extreme delight, Krishna took in applying colour on Radha and other gopis. This prank of Krishna later, became a trend and a part of the Holi festivities. Mythology also states that Holi is the celebration of death ofOgress Pootana who tried to kill infant, Krishna by feeding poisonous milk to it. Another legend of Holi which is extremely popular in Southern India is that of Lord Shiva and Kaamadeva. According to the legend, people in south celebrate the sacrifice of Lord of Passion Kaamadeva who risked his life to revoke Lord Shiva from meditation and save the world.
Also, popular is the legend of Ogress Dhundhi who used to trouble children in the kingdom of Raghu and was ultimately chased away by the pranks of the children on the day of Holi. Showing their belief in the legend, children till date play pranks and hurl abuses at the time of Holika Dahan.
Cultural Significance Celebration of the various legends associated with Holi reassure the people of the power of the truth as the moral of all these legends is the ultimate victory of good over evil. The legend of Hiranyakashyap and Prahlad also points to the fact that extreme devotion to god pays as god always takes his true devotee in his shelter.
All these legends help the people to follow a good conduct in their lives and believe in the virtue of being truthful. This is extremely important in the modern day society when so many people resort to evil practices for small gains and torture one who is honest. Holi helps the people to believe in the virtue of being truthful and honest and also to fight away the evil.
Besides, holi is celebrated at a time of the year when the fields are in full bloom and people are expecting a good harvest. This gives a people a good reason to rejoice, make merry and submerge themselves in the spirit of Holi.
Social Significance Holi helps to bring the society together and strengthen the secular fabric of our country. For, the festival is celebrated by non-Hindus also as everybody like to be a part of such a colouful and joyous festival. Also, the tradition of the Holi is that even the enemies turn friends on Holi and forget any feeling of hardship that may be present. Besides, on this day people do not differentiate between the rich and poor and everybody celebrate the festival together with a spirit of bonhomie and brotherhood. In the evening people visit friends and relatives and exchange gifts, sweets and greetings. This helps in revatalising relationships and strengthening emotional bonds between people.
Biological Significance It is interesting to note that the festival of Holi is significant for our lives and body in many other ways than providing joy and fun. We also need to thank our forefathers who started the trend of celebrating Holi at such a scientifically accurate time. And, also for incorporating so much fun in the festival.
As Holi comes at a time of the year when people have a tendency to feel sleepy and lazy. This is natural for the body to experiences some tardiness due to the change from the cold to the heat in the atmosphere. To counteract this tardiness of the body, people sing loudly or even speak loudly. Their movements are brisk and their music is loud. All of this helps to rejuvenate the system of the human body.
Besides, the colours when sprayed on the body have a great impact on it. Biologists believe the liquid dye or Abeer penetrates the body and enters into the pores. It has the effect of strengthening the ions in the body and adds health and beauty to it.
There is yet another scientific reason for celebrating the Holi, this however pertains to the tradition of Holika Dahan. The mutation period of winter and spring, induces the growth of bacteria in the atmosphere as well as in the body. When Holika is burnt, temperature rises to about 145 degrees Fahrenhiet. Following the tradition when people perform Parikrima (circumambulation or going around) around the fire, the heat from the fire kills the bacteria in the body thus, cleansing it.
The way Holi is celebrated in south, the festival also promotes good health. For, the day after the burning of Holika people put ash (Vibhuti) on their forehead and they would mix Chandan (sandalpaste) with the young leaves and flowers of the Mango tree and consume it to promote good health.
Some also believe that play with colours help to promote good healthas colours are said to have great impact on our body and our health. Western-Physicians and doctors believe that for a healthy body, colours too have an important place besides the other vital elements. Deficiency of a particular colour in our body causes ailment, which can be cured only after supplementing the body with that particular colour.
People also clean-up their houses on Holi which helps in clearing up the dust and mess in the house and get rid of mosquitoes and others pests. A clean house generally makes the residents feel good and generate positive energies.
As part of the overall $789 billion, approximately $50 billion will be set aside for programs focusing on promoting efficient and renewable energy. This follows Obama's announcement on Jan. 26 that his energy plan would invest a total of $150 billion over the next 10 years on a variety of projects, including vehicle efficiency, electrical efficiency, clean-coal power plants, biofuels and domestic oil and gas production.
His 10-year plan makes it clear that his administration will work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050, and he will start on that path by reviewing a Bush administration decision to deny California its own climate change-focused law. Obama also announced that he would ask the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review California's stringent emission standards, which were struck down by then-EPA chief Stephen Johnson in December 2007.
The first stated goal of Obama's energy plan is to fuel job growth through the "green" sector to the tune of at least 460,000 new jobs over the next three years. The stimulus package, which includes a short-term $50 billion (roughly) in energy projects, currently provides about $14 billion in loans for renewable energy projects, $4.5 billion for "smart grid" electricity updates, $6.4 billion for cleaning up nuclear weapon production sites, $6.3 billion in state-level energy efficiency grants, $5 billion for home weatherization projects and $4.5 billion for making federal buildings more energy efficient.The stimulus also allows for $18.9 billion in "green transportation," essentially improving public transit and building high-speed rail. These expenses represent only the first step in the $150 billion investment over 10 years to secure energy efficiency and energy independence.
The idea behind these projects is to try and push America's construction industry away from traditional home-building and remodeling (in 2008, residential construction fell a record 27.2 percent from the year before) toward a more green approach, which would include installing solar panels and efficient insulation in homes, schools and government buildings. This effort is similar to that undertaken in the 1930s during the Great Depression, when the government employed out-of-work tradesmen, artists and other workers to build public parks, paint murals in post offices and engage in other public works that were intended mainly to keep people busy. The Obama plan is intended to have the added benefit of creating a fundamentally new business sector — a green building industry — while decreasing the country's energy bill and putting people back to work. The government would be providing a stimulus for private business by creating incentives and a consumer demand for energy-efficient features that otherwise would not exist.
The second stated goal of Obama's long-term energy plan is to eliminate the U.S. dependency on Middle Eastern and Venezuelan oil imports by 2019.The United States imported roughly 10 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil in 2007; of this, imports from Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iraq, Kuwait and Venezuela combined to a total of 3.3 million bpd. Removing the need for Middle East and Venezuelan oil would give the United States much greater room for maneuver in both regions.
The 10-year energy plan also contains a climate-change portion. Obama's target (an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2050) is softer than Europe's (80 percent from 1990 levels by 2020), but his 25 percent renewable energy goal surpasses Europe's 20-20-20 plan. The European plan seeks to increase the EU's use of renewable fuels to 20 percent of total energy demand and reduce total EU energy demand by 20 percent, all by 2020. It is by decreasing reliance on non-renewable energy that Obama hopes to wean the United States off of Middle Eastern and Venezuelan oil.
Cap and Trade Program
One of the most ambitious proposals of the Obama energy plan is a national cap and trade program. Under such a program, the government would set emissions standard for various industries, allowing companies that emit less carbon dioxide than their allotment to trade their excess "credits" to those who are emitting above the cap. The initial allotments of carbon credits will incite one of the more contentious domestic debates in the coming years, as will the steepness of the emissions reduction curve. In addition to a national goal of 80 percent by 2050, there are questions about what the goal will be in 2020 or 2035.
Lobbying efforts are already under way regarding cap and trade. American businesses do not want to see states in charge of setting greenhouse gas emissions standards since that would increase the accounting and legal fees companies would have to incur to deal with the system on a state-by-state basis. Instead, they want to see a single national standard.
Establishing a national standard for a cap and trade system would allow utility companies to factor in future costs of emitting greenhouse gases, which currently is an unknown. Utility companies do not know whether it makes sense to build regular coal plants, clean coal plants, solar or wind installations or natural gas production facilities because the rules of the game are not set. Until that happens, energy expansion in the United States will be at a standstill.
However, the U.S. domestic climate-change policy must be negotiated at the global level, particularly with China. Obama, or any subsequent U.S. president, will be hard-pressed to adopt carbon emission rules without first getting some sort of a deal with China that would guarantee that Beijing would also address its own greenhouse emissions. Otherwise, U.S. greenhouse gas-emitting industries (chemicals, petrochemical, paper and pulp, steel, cement, etc.) could bolt for China and the developing world. Therefore, a conversation with Beijing about climate change is high on Obama's list of priorities; his energy envoy, Todd Stern, is accompanying Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on her current trip to East Asia, primarily to discuss some of Obama's energy ideas with the Chinese.
Improving Automobile Mileage
To reduce consumption of imported oil by approximately a third, Obama plans to force implementation of a congressional decision in 2007 to raise federal fuel economy requirements to 35 miles per gallon for cars by 2020, from their current level of 27.5 miles per gallon. (Today, about 60 percent of U.S. oil demand is used to power the American vehicle fleet.) The 2007 congressional decision was never put on a path for implementation by the Bush administration, which Obama will try to reverse by asking the Department of Transportation to come up with a plan by March to implement the mileage standard.
The problem with increasing the mileage of the current fleet (which has essentially averaged, on a fleet-wide basis, slightly above 20 miles per gallon since the early 1980s) is that it would necessitate replacing a substantial number of America's current fleet of over 250 million cars, small trucks and SUVs. In the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Congress allocated $25 billion to "reequipping, expanding, or establishing manufacturing facilities in the United States to produce qualifying advanced technology vehicles or qualifying components." However, all of the $25 billion was subsequently relocated to provide bridge loans to the auto industry as part of their bailout announced on Nov. 20, 2008.
Therefore, it will be up to consumers to replace their old automobiles with hybrid vehicles, and Obama hopes to encourage them to do so by offering $7,000 in tax credits per vehicle for the purchase of an "advanced vehicle" (presumably these would include various types of hybrids) and putting 1 million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015. This tax-credit program would have the U.S. government essentially spending a huge amount of money to buy new cars for people. Currently (figures are from December 2008), U.S. purchases of hybrids average 17,600 per month (down from about 30,000 during the first half of 2008), or approximately 3 percent of total purchases. At that rate, if Obama's $7,000-per-car system were adopted, the U.S. government would have to spend approximately $123 million in tax credits per month, or nearly $1.5 billion a year, just to sustain the current level of hybrid purchases.
Encouraging 'Plug-in' Hybrid Technology
The "plug-in" component of Obama's hybrid-vehicle plan is a direct plug for the domestic manufacturer General Motors Corporation (GM), which has essentially put all of its eggs in one basket with its flagship to-be Chevrolet Volt electric plug-in car. The Volt, which can go 40 miles purely on stored electricity before switching to its onboard gasoline engine, will have a price tag of more than $40,000, which means that even with the $7,000 tax credit for advanced vehicles (which presumably would also go for the cheaper Japanese hybrids), the Volt would cost essentially twice as much as its foreign competition. GM flatly stated in recent congressional hearings that the Volt would not be profitable in its first production run, that total costs of production would be around $750 million and that return on the investment could be expected only after 2016 — a risky strategy for a troubled manufacturer, to say the least.
At the moment, however, there is very little certainty that U.S. consumers would choose a U.S. made plug-in hybrid like the Volt over the (mostly Japanese) competition. Complicating calculations relating to the energy efficiency of the plug-in electric hybrid is the fact that the economics and ecological benefits of these vehicles depend on local electricity costs and the relative "greenness" of the consumer's power source. A traditional gasoline-electric hybrid contributes to less net greenhouse gas emissions than a plug-in hybrid in states that rely on coal for electricity generation. This calculation would change, of course, with changes in the electrical grid (see below).
Investing in Coal
Obama's plan is to "develop and deploy clean coal technology" as part of relying more on domestic energy resources. If there is one non-renewable source of energy that the United States has plenty of it is coal. In 2006, U.S. proven reserves totaled 27.1 percent of total global coal reserves, the highest number in the world. Coal already accounts for roughly 51 percent of U.S. electricity generation (in 2007) and for 22.8 percent of total energy use in the United States.
At the center of the debate over coal in the United States is the question of "clean coal" technology, especially carbon capture and sequestration. As the term implies, this combination of techniques allows for a coal-fired power plant to produce power without spewing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. Instead, the carbon is captured and sent to deep underground repositories where it is sequestered. The technology could prove to be a panacea (should it ever become cost-effective): The United States has over a quarter of the world's coal; it wants to increase its domestic energy sources; and it needs to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. The only problem is, while the technology exists, no one has figured out a way to employ it economically.
To retrofit an existing coal plant would cost approximately $1 billion to $2 billion (a 300 megawatt coal plant by itself costs about $1 billion and a 630 megawatt costs around $2.4 billion) and would require a doubling of the actual acreage on which the plant was built. An additional problem is that capture and sequestration would consume 30 percent of the plant output, substantially limiting the total energy output of the plant.
The elephant in the room is the potential cost of a complete overhaul of many of the current coal-burning plants, which would likely be necessary to make them economically viable under a future cap-and-trade system. The price tag for such an overhaul would be monstrous and definitely higher than the $150 billion currently earmarked for the next 10 years for all energy projects. The United States has 1,470 coal-burning plants, and if the cost of retrofitting for subterranean sequestration is factored in, the numbers would be astronomical and could measure in the trillions.
The final problem facing the coal industry is that the authority to regulate the building of new power plants in the United States rests with state governments, not the federal government. Some state governments have come under pressure from environmental groups to delay or cancel the building of coal power plants to avoid exacerbating climate change. In other states, environmental organizations have used lawsuits to tie up proposed coal plants for years. These lawsuits have added to the uncertainty surrounding the economics of building new coal plants. The economic uncertainty, legal uncertainty and litigation have resulted in a situation in which of the 151 coal plants proposed for construction in 2007, 109 were essentially scrapped or tied up in court, with only 28 actually under construction in 2008.
Promoting Ethanol
Encouraging a greater use of ethanol was one of Obama's primary electoral campaign messages, particularly to the corn-producing region in the Midwest where he picked up Iowa — the undisputed corn producing king — by a wide margin (Iowa voted Republican in 2004 and Democratic only by a slim margin in 2000). Derived mainly from corn, ethanol could be produced and mixed with refined petroleum to create enough gasoline to fulfill America's transportation energy needs (which account for 30 percent of total energy usage and over half of oil use in the U.S.). To fulfill Obama's pledge to wean the United States from Middle Eastern and Venezuelan oil, U.S. refineries would probably have to use six times as much ethanol in gasoline than they currently do.
The key problem with such a surge in ethanol use is that it would appreciate food prices. According to calculations by the University of Illinois economics department, with oil prices at $50 per barrel it is profitable to convert corn into ethanol if corn prices are lower than $4 per bushel. Corn prices currently stand at approximately $3.67 per bushel. If oil were to climb above $50 per barrel, it would be more profitable for farmers to sell corn to ethanol refineries than to sell it for food. As oil prices climb, the threshold for corn prices rises as well, giving farmers more incentive to convert corn into fuel and thus raise food prices.
One way to avoid raising food prices would be to produce ethanol from cellulosic material (essentially any sort of non-edible plant material, from grass to corn stalks). The problem with cellulosic material is that it requires expensive enzymes to break down the plant material before it can be refined — a recent study found that this process is competitive only with oil prices above $90 a barrel. The process would also require gathering massive amounts of low-value raw materials — itself a very energy-intensive process because these materials have to be transported from the farm to the refinery. Currently, cellulosic materials like chaff are simply ploughed into the soil as fertilizer, burned or used for animal feed. In order to use it as a main source of ethanol production, the material would have to be shipped to refineries from the farm.
The current collection-transportation networks in the Midwest are calibrated for food distribution, not gasoline delivery. Therefore the first problem is how to get the cellulosic material to the refineries. Chaff and agricultural by-products are usually less dense than corn, so it would take more trips to the local refinery to make it worthwhile, increasing transportation costs. Farms would either have to ship their agricultural waste for refinement to a centralized collection point (most likely right next to the grain elevator) or run rudimentary refineries right on their farms.
Either way, once the refining process is complete, the ethanol would have to be shipped to consumers around the country (most of who are on the coasts, far from the Midwest). There is no pipeline network ready to take the fuel-ready ethanol from refineries to the coasts, and such a network (one akin to the natural gas pipeline network in Europe may have to be developed) would be an extremely expensive project. Therefore, a switch to ethanol could work for the Midwest, leading to a bifurcated system where the coasts still use petroleum for transportation while the agricultural producing regions rely on ethanol.
The Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline
To boost domestic production of energy, Obama's plan would "prioritize the construction of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline," which would tap natural gas deposits in Prudhoe Bay on the banks of the Arctic Ocean. To get the pipeline to reach the U.S. lower 48 it would have to cross more than 1,500 miles, including the imposing Alaskan Brooks Mountain Range. The project is not new. It was proposed in the late 1960s, when the deposits were discovered, and became a popular idea during the oil shocks of the early 1970s. Today there are three competing pipeline projects being considered: ExxonMobil's MackenzieValley ($16.3 billion), the TransCanada project ($26 billion) and BP-ConocoPhillips' Denali project (somewhere between $30 billion and $40 billion). All three projects are financially daunting, comparable to the Soviet-style infrastructural development that aims to connect Russian natural gas fields on the YamalPeninsula with consumers in Europe. As a point of comparison, the Yamal-Europe pipeline that ships natural gas from Russia to Germany via Poland and Belarus traverses over 4,000 miles of flat terrain and cost roughly $45 billion. As such, it is actually cheaper per mile of pipeline than either the TransCanada project or BP-ConocoPhillips's Denali project.
'Use it or Lose it' Lease Strategy
A U.S. congressional report, supported by Democrats on the House Natural Resources Committee, has highlighted 68 million acres "of leased but currently inactive federal land and waters" that could produce "an additional 4.8 million bpd of oil." Intrinsically, this production would decrease U.S. imports by 75 percent and eliminate the need for Middle Eastern and Venezuelan imports. The Obama energy plan would seek to boost domestic oil production by tapping this supposed wealth of untapped domestic wells that energy firms hold leases on but choose not to produce from.
The problem with this plan is that U.S. energy firms hold leases on potential wells and deposits that often require a long period of time to survey. Some underwater deposits are unable to be exploited, at least until technology is improved (which generally takes years and sometimes decades). By forcing energy companies to "use it or lose it," the government will discourage careful surveying and most likely run off the energy firms from the deposits by attempting to force them to develop currently uneconomical fields. Unless the U.S. government develops a state-owned energy company willing to tap and produce from fields for a loss, there is no point in taking leases away from energy firms.
The 'Smart Grid'
Ultimately the most significant change to America's energy usage and efficiency may be the retooling of the entire electricity grid and transforming it into a so-called "smart grid." This is essentially an amalgamation of modern technologies in the distribution and supply of electricity. It uses digital technology (such as digital electricity readers, which would replace manual readers) to coordinate supply and demand of electricity across the nation. It combines more efficient distribution of electricity to consumers with advanced long-distance transmission lines that would be able to take alternative energy sources (such as wind power) to electricity markets far away.
As such, a smart grid would introduce two-way communication between energy suppliers and consumers, allowing utilities to direct power more efficiently away from low-energy users to high-energy users depending on the time of day or need. It would also give consumers more room to create their own usage preferences by actually programming how (and when) their appliances use energy. The smart grid would also regulate electricity use of homes and businesses by being able to turn off appliances that are not being used during peak times.
The concept is simple enough and would update America's electricity infrastructure (currently running on technology not much different from its nascent stages in the 19th century) to a modern digital consumer/provider system. However, such a national grid would necessitate replacing all of America's electricity meters, as well as all transmission lines and all transformer stations, a project with a likely price tag of somewhere near $200 billion. The current stimulus package, however, commits only $4.5 billion to a smart-grid upgrading of some 3,000 miles of transmission lines and equipping about 40 million homes with "smart meters." This funding will not be enough to begin a serious overhaul of America's electricity transmission network. It is more an attempt to kick-start industry and private businesses and move them toward an eventual retooling.
The coal ministry is allocating one of the three coal blocks ( Sri rampur, palasbani, ramchandi coal blocks) in Talcher Coalfield in Orissa for liquefaction. With a coal reserve of 1 to 1.5 billion tonnes in each block, and about 30 million tonnes of coal available every year, each block could produce about one million tonne of oil. The expected investment for a 3.5 million tonne oil and oil products project is expected to be around 6 to 8 billion US dollars.
CTL (Coal to Liquid) is energy intensive and given current concerns with green house gas emissions, the carbon foot print of the CTL option per unit of final energy service delivered is an important element for evaluating technology alternatives. Water requirement is also an important consideration in the choice of technology given the severe water stress in the coal bearing areas.
There had been lots of hue and cry for the said project. Questions were arised on the viability of the project in terms of technology , operations and finances. As oil prices are hovering around $35 per barrel, experts feel that the project may not get the requisite support from the govt as the project is only viable if the oil price remains above $80 per barrel.
Out of 22 bidders for the project, the IMG ( Inter Ministerial group) short listed 2 bidders (Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) and Strategic Energy Technology Systems (a joint venture between Tata Sons and South African energy company Sasol) on the basis of criteria specified ( RS 4000crore of minimum net worth with viable technology ).
The finance ministry in its recommendation said that the developer must be selected on the basis of profit sharing and not on the basis of royalty amount. This created an unnecessary delay as the coal ministry did not get finance ministry’s nod.
And now in a recent development, law ministry has suggested the government to invite fresh bids from companies interested in coal-to-oil projects if it is interested in profit-sharing. This has halted the coal ministry’s bid finalisation process for country’s first coal-to liquid project.
The ministry has advised that a fresh application for allotment of coal blocks for the project should be invited with the profit sharing clause, otherwise the other bidders may go to the court over the issue of profit sharing clause.
The government is very ambitious about the project but the selection procedure as well as the criteria for bidding remains the big hurdle. After questions raised by the finance ministry and now law ministry , govt may takeextra time to finalise the process. The market scenario is also not helping the government as people feel that at this point of time the CTL will not be a good option for the government.
Amidst all the problems, for India’s energy security CTL will remain one of the options for a long term perspective. Lets hope India overcomes all the problems and the CTL project kicks of at a near future.
The whole world is suffering from the financial tsunami. Big names/corporates were first to fall and the induction effect still continuing. Despite several measures by the state govts world wide, there is no sign for a quick removal.Demands falter as people are skeptical of the future and the less spending on items with job losses world wide triggers a severe meltdown. Slowly and steadily, the effect is everywhere.
With the ILO predicting as many as 50 million jobs will be lost in the developing world and the world bank projecting zero growth in per capita income in Africa, the livelihoods of as many as four billion people are at stake.Already there have been dramatic withdrawals of capital from emerging markets and a drying up of credit including trade finances.Remittances are declining as immigrants returning home.
What it implies for India? Indian techies are loosing their jobs worldwide, more vulnerable are those who are working with MNCs and residing overseas.U.S. President Barack Obama recently signed into law a $787-billion US stimulus package to help lift the country's economy out of recession but with a word of cautious.It will directly impact to H1B visa holders as the companies receiving this fund will refrain from hiring outside workers.
Don't you think this is the clear sign of protectionism. Remember this is the same USA propagating the free trade concept and advocating open market, even labour reforms in WTO. What is happening right now? It is forced to take such measures so as to protect its own job.
People in MNCs are forced to quit company as projects dried up.Once the lucrative market is now shivering under tremendous pressure.Bad news are breaking news today as there is some kind of news of job loss or people coming from overseas after loosing jobs.This is bad bad news for India.
But then the time has come to reinvent ourselves , to think and to develop a future vision. India is growing, no doubt today we are the second largest economy and less affected by this financial crisis.There is anoromous scope to grow here in India.
It is time NRIs give this a first thought and should come back home without any further delay.India needs best brains. We have all the resources with us and also the will power to grow.
Though we are hit hard by the financial crisis but this is the right time to wake up and take the country to the top. we do not need external help for this. We have the inherent strength within us to reach the zenith.We have the technology,experts, raw materials, education etc.
In my opinion, this is the right time to come back home and to serve our own country. It is better to live in a dignified way rather to be kicked away from a foreign country. Though I know, India do not have the luxury as the western countries do but this is not in our culture to find faults in our mothers.
We have to stand by our own and not by any outsiders help. Wake up Indians..come back home.
Govt of India , in its effort to ramp up hydro power capacity of the country mulls the idea to develop UMPP ( Ultra Mega Power Plants) in hydro projects. India is currently developing coal based UMPP and already 4 UMPPs have been awarded.
In UMPP, SPVs ( Special Purpose Vehicles) are created for particular UMPP where the SPV facilitates in aquiring all kind of clearances and the SPV is transferred to the successful bidder at a later stage.
But in case of hydro projectswhich are extremely site-specific and are not as modular as thermal projects, a huge amount of preparation is required. The detailed project reports need to be prepared upfront.The states have not come up with the DPR at the time of awarding the hydropower projects.
With the share of hydropower falling from 40% to 25% in the past 20 years, the government is worried, as the sector accounts for only 32,000MW of the country’s 147,000MW power generating capacity.
In an attempt to create large hydropower capacities and attract investment in the sector, the power ministry had written to Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh, asking them to identify and allocate projects with a potential of at least 500MW, to be awarded through the UMPP model. State govt are skeptical about the huge hydro power projects as these projects cause environmental problems as well as severe R&R issues. State govt are demanding an upfront fee from the developers which does not augur well with the project developers and sometimes they back out of the projects.
Last year, state-owned NTPC Ltd’s refusal to pay an advance amount led to the cancellation of a contract to develop two hydropower projects in Arunachal Pradesh at an estimated cost of Rs22,500 crore. The state wanted NTPC to pay Rs5 lakh per MW as upfront payment for the projects at Etalin (4,000MW) and Attunli (500MW).
Arunachal Pradesh government charges an upfront premium of Rs1 lakh to Rs6 lakh per MW, depending upon the size of the project. The north-eastern state is at the centre of the controversy because it has the highest potential for hydropower in India. The potential of hydropower of all the north-eastern states and Bhutan is about 58,000MW. Of this, Arunachal Pradesh alone accounts for 50,328MW. In northern India, Himachal Pradesh has a potential of producing 20,376MW from hydropower plants and Uttarakhand, 16,500MW.
The upfront premium is the bone of contention in case of the proposed hydro UMPP. On one side, govt fears to identify and declare a site for the project as it may backlash with the people rejecting the idea and in an election year the govt do not want to take any risks.
And in the other side, the upfront advance premium demanded by the govt do not seem to hold water with the project developers as they are skeptical of the project coming up. These hurdles do need some serious thought and should be resolved in an amicable manner so as to develop India as a power hub.
The government has increased the budget outlay for the power sector in 2009-10 by over 43 per cent to Rs 52,126.27 crore that may help tap electricity from clean sources. If we want to develop cleaner sources of power, we would require budgetary support for that. This additional budgetary support would help. We would look forward to efficiency in generation and demand side management,'' former Power Secretary Mr Anil Raz dan said.
Compared to Rs 36,307.47 crore plan outlay for the Power Ministry for this financial year, the government has made a provision of Rs 52,126.27 crore for 2009-10 in the interim budget tabled in Lok Sabha on Friday by Finance Minister, Mr Pranab Mukherjee. The additional budgetary support is likely to give boost to companies such as Power Finance Corp and Rural Electrification Corp, engaged in financing power projects.
“This additional support would help the generating companies like NTPC, NHPC and others, if this (additional support) is made available to more projects, it would bring more opportunities for us,'' PFC CMD, Mr Satnam Singh said. “This would not really impact NTPC as we are not dependent on government support, but it would give boost to other generating companies in the power sector,'' a senior NTPC official said.
Is it sufficient??
No doubt , the govt has increased the budgetary allocation but this is too little.A gigantic target , to add nearly 8000MW in 11th plan seems nearly impossible , taking previous targeted addition.
And in recent financial crunch where projects are not getting money from lenders, govt should have gone out of the way to support infrastructure in a huge manner and particularly for power sector. It missed a golden chance to build up infrastructure as well as creating additional jobs out of it.
For all this and more, I would like to express my deep gratitude to UPA partners and supporters who walked the extra mile with us in this journey.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, our people will soon be called upon to exercise their democratic right to choose the next Government. The Indian people have repeatedly shown that they can be relied upon to make sound decisions to secure the nation’s future. They have seen how the ‘Aam Aadmi’ has become the focus of the development process. They have also seen how our Government has successfully steered the country through difficult times. They have experienced the joy of being citizens of a proud nation moving ahead with confidence. I have no doubt that when the time comes, our people will recognize the hand that made it all possible. The hand that alone can help our nation on the road to peace and prosperity.
My Reaction:
Wow! Mr Finance Minister, rightly said by the communists and the BJP...this is the election speech in the midst of parliament.
Could you find the reference of hand ( twice in red colour highlighted )..the symbol of INC. This can only happen in India. When the market, common man, the unemployed and the whole nation at large were looking upto the FM for presenting a budget which can wither away some of their worries by infusing some of hope..the budget was a complete disaster.
We were expecting some funds infusion or any package for the ailing industry but nothing like that happens. The present regime is having a huge liability as well the deficit is rising. No doubt, the next government will bear the burnt of such huge liability and it would be impossible for the next government to strike a balance. The collection of tax which is going southwords is also a major cause of concern.
Mrinal Pande- Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:36 AM
What all Renuka's rantings about Pub Bharo , could not achieve , a bunch of feisty young women journos with a healthy sense of humour have managed , by sending out a call via Facebook , for bombarding the violent armies of Ram Sainiks with pink Chaddis on Valentine's Day . These young women and their supporters are the true practitioners of Gandhigiri in our times . By a totally non violent but well timed comic gesture , they have reminded the public at once of the Khaki that lies beneath the saffron , and the ultra Right's ridiculous intolerance of women's assertion of their equality.
The women succeded for the same reason that Renuka failed . Their ire against the fascist activists of Mangalore was rooted in a democratic dislike for an attempt at curbing the basic liberties of citizens of all kinds , whereas Renuka wished to score debating points with a larger than life drama and in the process earn political Brownie points for her party . Her demand for storming pubs to protest against Sene's stand was as impractical , unGandhian and open to legitimate criticism as Advani's earlier demand for death penalty for rapists . Neither suggestion was practical , or addressed the root of the problem . Both tried to cash in on the public disgust for the act quickly and in doing so politicised the main issue and wiped off the human aspect of the crime .
So my congratulations to the young , who are shrewder , more compassionate and much better strategists than the senior political leaders .
My Reaction:
Dear madam, Though you have raised a valid point, the gandhian way of protesting by the young intellectual women yield results but the title is offensive to many. What do you mean by " khaki made to turn pink". What is this khaki symbolises. If by khakis , you want to turn your fingers on right wing organisations like RSS, then let me remind you that you are doing a terrible mistake. What is this Rama sene and their way of acting? They got what they want, cheap publicity. It would have been better if we could raise slogans and make people united to punish those guilty persons. No doubt, this is a victory with Chaddis and panties as weapons of destruction but it would have been better if you would have been written it in a different way. Its my sincere request to you to remove that khaki word from your writing.It is offensive to a particular organisation which stand for cultural unity and social upliftment of people.
"When the going is tough, then the tough gets going"...is the concluding remark of Mr Chanda Roy, Director (Operations) NTPC in the eve of inaguration of International O& M Confrence at Le Meridian, New Delhi on February 13, 2009.NTPC is organising IPS-2009 ( Indian Power Stations-2009 ) to commemorate the first unit of commissioning of NTPC Singrauli power station on 13th February, 1982.
NTPC which has installed capacity of 30626MW is the largest power generation company in India. It has nearly 24oooemployees and it plans to be a 75000MW company by 2017.Its plants are highly efficient. Currently it is foraying into hydro, coal mining and renewables. It is by and large a energy integrated company. At the same time, it is having its own problems.
It is struggling with fuel issues ( Coal and Gas availability ).Due to non availability of fuel, generation was starnded which is a big loss to the nation.
Speaking on the occasion, Mr jairam Ramesh very rightly identified 3 criticalpoints .
Environmental issues
Competitive challenges
HR issues
NTPC is 3rd largest polluter in terms of GHG emmission , though it can take credit of being the 2nd lowest emmitter in terms of CO2 intensity (i.e) Co2 generated per MW unit generation. But it will have to face resistance from the global community as well as from our own country. There is also inherent problems of land acquisition and water availabilty. NTPC has recently started installing equipments worth 30 crores to measure CO2 emmission which is unique on its own.NTPC should focus on itigating carbon emmissins
On competitve challenges, the minister of state said that the UMPPs are getting out of the reach of NTPC besides having competitive advantages. This is vary sad. While private companies are quoting at Rs 1.70 for pit head power plants, NTPC quoting Rs 2.24 which is not done. The real competition will arise when in 2011, all the power projects will be awarded on the basis of competitive bidding and at that time it will be do or die like situation for NTPC as it will complete directly with private players. So he warned NTPC to prepare fully for the head on competition and assured that Govt will help it fully in its endevour. NTPC officials are always talking of problems with CVC when it comes to competitive bidding and blame it on the internal structure of the company and the association with BHEL for not quoting a comparable lower tariff.
Last but not the least, he highlighted the HR problems in NTPC and told that the challenge before NTPC is recruit and retain the engineering and management staffs. He even called back the NTPC top guns who shunned NTPC and joined private organisations for sake of money.Private companies are reaping benefit because of NTPC employees working there with their talent and experience.He also expressed concerns over the average age profile of NTPC employees which is around mid 40 level.
Other speakers on the dias did highlight other imporatnt issues but CEA once again reiterated that NTPC should not depend on CIL for its coal supplies. It must import coal or develop captive coal mines within time schedule so as to fulfill its targeted generation.
The CERC norms are getting tougher day by day and its a big challenge to make available the plant for 85%.
While there are challenges all around, NTPC has the strength to tackle it on its own. The aim is big and like Mr Chandan Roy said when the going is tough, the tough gets going...
Lets hope NTPC achieve its target and serve the country with its vision and mission.
Posts
