NAMC Newswire - Hybrid Vehicles Are in Vogue, From Ethanol to Fuel Cells: "NEW YORK, NY, (NAMC) � On the heels of President Bush�s State of the Union Address which focused on alternative energy and ethanol, Ford Motor Company (NYSE: F) is yet again bringing its commitment to American innovation with ways to boost the availability of energy -savings vehicles. Ford is teaming up with energy partners, city and state governments, public and private companies to further expand the hottest energy savings vehicle on the market the �Escape Hybrid E85�, vehicles capable of running on E85 ethanol.
E85 ethanol is a fuel blend that contains 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline. The great thing about ethanol is that it�s completely renewable fuel, and it�s made from corn. One of the hurdles that Ford is trying to overcome are ethanol-related vapor and combustion issues, which they feel that they could overcome very shortly.
Ford also has an ongoing partnership with VeraSun Energy, which is a renewable energy company. This partnership will allow Ford to launch the beginnings of a �Mid West Ethanol Corridor�. This will expand E85 ethanol fuel availability by about one-third throughout the states of Illinois and Missouri.
Also in the works are Hybrid taxi cabs, cities such as Chicago. New York City and San Francisco have already put Ford Escape Hybrid E85 taxis on the road, which contributes to substantial savings on gas and improved quality air. Many other neighboring states will follow suit by converting to energy savings vehicles and the usage of ethanol.
On another alternative fuel solution, the world's largest fleet of fuel cell vehicles, Daimler Chrysler (NYSE: DCX) unveiled five new fuel-cell powered Mercedes- Benz cars to be used in Los Angeles Internation"
Thursday, February 16, 2006
DaimlerChrysler Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Vehicles Enter Service at Los Angeles Airport
Five Prototype Zero-Emission Cars Will Be Tested in Everyday Use at LAX for Two Years
LOS ANGELES, CA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 02/10/2006 -- DaimlerChrysler presented officials at Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) today the keys to five hydrogen fuel-cell powered Mercedes-Benz F-Cell cars to use in its vehicle fleet at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) to further the development and experience with this zero-emission vehicle technology.
"Today's event exhibits how DaimlerChrysler, BP, Praxair and LAX are taking on the challenge for industries and governments to create viable alternative-fuel solutions," said Mark Chernoby, vice-president of Advance Vehicle Engineering -- Chrysler Group. "We're pleased to be a driving force in this team effort to develop fuel-cell technology."
While receiving the keys to the demonstration vehicles, LAWA alternative fuels fleet manager Dave Waldner, said, "Los Angeles World Airports has been committed to alternative-fuel technology since 1993, when we introduced such technology into our airport operations. Hydrogen fuel-cell power is the next clean-fuel technology, and we are pleased to be in the forefront of its development. The addition of hydrogen-fuel cars into our fleet today and the establishment of a retail-designed fueling station at LAX in 2004 are concrete examples of our commitment to improving air quality."
Based on a Mercedes-Benz, the F-Cell vehicle is designed with the entire fuel-cell system housed in the floor, leaving full use of the passenger and cargo spaces. The car has a range of approximately 100 miles and a top speed of about 85 mph.
The addition of five hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles makes LAX one of the largest test sites in the United States for fuel-cell vehicles, and the only airport site. After undergoing basic training in the operation and fueling of the cars, LAWA employees will use the cars for general transportation in the course of their duties in and around LAX and Southern California during the two-year term of the agreement with DaimlerChrysler.
LAX has one of the largest airport-based alternative-fuel vehicle fleets in the nation, where 53 percent of its airport vehicles are powered by alternative fuels. Currently, over 450 vehicles use compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, propane and hybrid-electric, and solar power at LAX, Ontario International and Van Nuys Airports.
LAWA's agreement with DaimlerChrysler calls for receiving the cars in exchange for providing operational and test data that could affect future designs of F-Cell vehicles and fueling stations. This effort will contribute to the establishment of a hydrogen infrastructure to fuel a growing number of zero-emission, hydrogen-powered cars.
DaimlerChrysler has one of the world's largest fleet of fuel-cell vehicles with over 25 fuel-cell vehicles in customer hands in California and more than 100 around the world. The automaker's total fuel-cell fleet is comprised of 60 Mercedes-Benz F-Cell passenger cars, several research vehicles, medium-duty Dodge Sprinter vans, and more than 30 Mercedes-Benz Citaro buses that operate in Europe, the United States, Japan, Australia and Singapore.
DaimlerChrysler and Los Angeles World Airports support Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's efforts and goals to establish a California Hydrogen Highway Network. DaimlerChrysler is also involved with the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in other programs that enable DaimlerChrysler and its partners to gain extensive operational familiarity with fuel-cell vehicles and hydrogen fueling stations.
LAX's new F-Cell vehicles will refuel at a retail-designed hydrogen fueling station that opened at the airport in October 2004. The station is a joint project funded by BP, Praxair, LAWA, South Coast Air Quality Management District, California Energy Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy, all of which helped fund the nearly $2 million construction cost.
Fuel cells release energy from the reaction of hydrogen with a catalyst and oxygen. This clean technology operates at a high level of efficiency and is true zero-emission. Hydrogen-powered fuel-cell vehicles emit only pure water vapor as exhaust.
LAWA is a City of Los Angeles department that owns and operates four airports in Southern California: LAX, Ontario International, Palmdale Regional and Van Nuys.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACTS:
Chrysler
Nicholas Cappa
(248) 512-4266
or Cole Quinnell
(248) 807-0590
LAWA
Thomas Winfrey
(310) 646-5260
SOURCE: Los Angeles World Airports
Five Prototype Zero-Emission Cars Will Be Tested in Everyday Use at LAX for Two Years
LOS ANGELES, CA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 02/10/2006 -- DaimlerChrysler presented officials at Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) today the keys to five hydrogen fuel-cell powered Mercedes-Benz F-Cell cars to use in its vehicle fleet at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) to further the development and experience with this zero-emission vehicle technology.
"Today's event exhibits how DaimlerChrysler, BP, Praxair and LAX are taking on the challenge for industries and governments to create viable alternative-fuel solutions," said Mark Chernoby, vice-president of Advance Vehicle Engineering -- Chrysler Group. "We're pleased to be a driving force in this team effort to develop fuel-cell technology."
While receiving the keys to the demonstration vehicles, LAWA alternative fuels fleet manager Dave Waldner, said, "Los Angeles World Airports has been committed to alternative-fuel technology since 1993, when we introduced such technology into our airport operations. Hydrogen fuel-cell power is the next clean-fuel technology, and we are pleased to be in the forefront of its development. The addition of hydrogen-fuel cars into our fleet today and the establishment of a retail-designed fueling station at LAX in 2004 are concrete examples of our commitment to improving air quality."
Based on a Mercedes-Benz, the F-Cell vehicle is designed with the entire fuel-cell system housed in the floor, leaving full use of the passenger and cargo spaces. The car has a range of approximately 100 miles and a top speed of about 85 mph.
The addition of five hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles makes LAX one of the largest test sites in the United States for fuel-cell vehicles, and the only airport site. After undergoing basic training in the operation and fueling of the cars, LAWA employees will use the cars for general transportation in the course of their duties in and around LAX and Southern California during the two-year term of the agreement with DaimlerChrysler.
LAX has one of the largest airport-based alternative-fuel vehicle fleets in the nation, where 53 percent of its airport vehicles are powered by alternative fuels. Currently, over 450 vehicles use compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, propane and hybrid-electric, and solar power at LAX, Ontario International and Van Nuys Airports.
LAWA's agreement with DaimlerChrysler calls for receiving the cars in exchange for providing operational and test data that could affect future designs of F-Cell vehicles and fueling stations. This effort will contribute to the establishment of a hydrogen infrastructure to fuel a growing number of zero-emission, hydrogen-powered cars.
DaimlerChrysler has one of the world's largest fleet of fuel-cell vehicles with over 25 fuel-cell vehicles in customer hands in California and more than 100 around the world. The automaker's total fuel-cell fleet is comprised of 60 Mercedes-Benz F-Cell passenger cars, several research vehicles, medium-duty Dodge Sprinter vans, and more than 30 Mercedes-Benz Citaro buses that operate in Europe, the United States, Japan, Australia and Singapore.
DaimlerChrysler and Los Angeles World Airports support Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's efforts and goals to establish a California Hydrogen Highway Network. DaimlerChrysler is also involved with the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in other programs that enable DaimlerChrysler and its partners to gain extensive operational familiarity with fuel-cell vehicles and hydrogen fueling stations.
LAX's new F-Cell vehicles will refuel at a retail-designed hydrogen fueling station that opened at the airport in October 2004. The station is a joint project funded by BP, Praxair, LAWA, South Coast Air Quality Management District, California Energy Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy, all of which helped fund the nearly $2 million construction cost.
Fuel cells release energy from the reaction of hydrogen with a catalyst and oxygen. This clean technology operates at a high level of efficiency and is true zero-emission. Hydrogen-powered fuel-cell vehicles emit only pure water vapor as exhaust.
LAWA is a City of Los Angeles department that owns and operates four airports in Southern California: LAX, Ontario International, Palmdale Regional and Van Nuys.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACTS:
Chrysler
Nicholas Cappa
(248) 512-4266
or Cole Quinnell
(248) 807-0590
LAWA
Thomas Winfrey
(310) 646-5260
SOURCE: Los Angeles World Airports
Energy innovation project lauded
SAN FRANCISCO - A sun-drenched celebratory gathering Friday of energy company executives and officials from the Bush and Schwarzenegger administrations demonstrated the extent to which alternative energy -- electricity and heat made with nonfossil fuels -- has recently come in from the cold.
The event marked completion of a $15 million investment in hydrogen fuel cells, solar panels and conservation measures aimed at cutting two San Francisco postal facilities' annual power costs by $1.2 million and emissions of carbon dioxide that contribute to global warming by 6,600 tons.
The project, overseen by a unit of San Ramon-based Chevron Corp., demonstrates how energy use, pollution and costs can be cut by efforts "grounded in economics but lifted and enabled by ingenuity," said Rhonda Zygocki, the company's vice president of health, environment and safety.
The economics of California energy projects depend largely on the price of petroleum and natural gas, the key fuels for the state's energy systems. Recent high prices for oil and gas have closed the cost gap between conventional power plants and environmentally friendly but more expensive alternative energy sources, such as solar and fuel cell units.
High prices for electricity, heating fuel and gasoline have also irritated consumers, and increased the urgency with which politicians and energy companies pursue projects to boost energy supplies. "We need all the energy we can get from every available stream," Zygocki said.
The completed postal project is part of a $47 million program to upgrade energy systems at Northern California postal facilities -- including Oakland, Berkeley and Livermore -- by Chevron Energy Solutions, a small energy-consulting subsidiary that Chevron acquired from PG&E in 2000.
While Chevron Energy Solutions' $200 million business doesn't rate its own line in the income statements of its parent, which posted a profit of $14.1 billion on revenue of $198.2 billion in 2005, a stellar lineup of top government officials turned out to hail its work.
Stephen Johnson, administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, traveled from Washington to speak at the unveiling of a project whose 0.5 megawatt of power capacity would cover only a tiny sliver of California's 55,000-megawatt peak demand. Johnson used the occasion to reaffirm President Bush's recent promise to cut oil consumption. "America is too reliant on foreign energy and the best way to break this dependency is through innovative technology," Johnson said.
The EPA chief also embraced the green character of the project: "What's good for the environment is also a good use for our energy dollars."
The U.S. Postal Service rounded up the money for this project by combining $8.3 million from energy savings, $4 million set aside to phase out refrigeration chemicals that hurt the ozone layer, a $2.3 million subsidy funded by California utility customers and $250,000 from the Defense Department.
Terry Tamminen, a special assistant to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, showed up to remind the audience of that administration's commitment to hydrogen as a transportation fuel, renewable energy, adequate power supplies, energy efficient buildings and lower greenhouse gas emissions. He pointed to the new project as "the epitome" of that administration's support for public-private partnerships.
Schwarzenegger himself was in Los Angeles on Friday to announce a $1 billion project that would use oil refinery waste products to produce hydrogen fuel for a 500-megawatt power plant and then pipe the carbon dioxide emissions from that process to Central California to inject and boost output in aging oil fields.
But that more ambitious project won't be pursued unless feasibility studies show it to be viable, said Doug McFarlan, a spokesman for Edison International, a Southern California utility holding company that is undertaking the experiment with BP, the London-based oil company. McFarlan acknowledged that at $2 a watt the power plant would be much more expensive than a conventional unit, but he said that other factors, including fuel cost savings or revenue from carbon dioxide sales, could close that gap.
But public support for alternative energy has proved fickle in the past. Perhaps anticipating a day when the photo opportunities have faded and economic realities have changed, U.S. Postal Service Senior Vice President Thomas Day pointed to one ultimate saving grace for his company's new power source: "If there is a blackout, the lights at the San Francisco Distribution and Power Center will stay on."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Jurgens covers energy and business. Reach him at 925-943-8088 or at rjurgens@cctimes.com.
This story was changed after initial posting to
SAN FRANCISCO - A sun-drenched celebratory gathering Friday of energy company executives and officials from the Bush and Schwarzenegger administrations demonstrated the extent to which alternative energy -- electricity and heat made with nonfossil fuels -- has recently come in from the cold.
The event marked completion of a $15 million investment in hydrogen fuel cells, solar panels and conservation measures aimed at cutting two San Francisco postal facilities' annual power costs by $1.2 million and emissions of carbon dioxide that contribute to global warming by 6,600 tons.
The project, overseen by a unit of San Ramon-based Chevron Corp., demonstrates how energy use, pollution and costs can be cut by efforts "grounded in economics but lifted and enabled by ingenuity," said Rhonda Zygocki, the company's vice president of health, environment and safety.
The economics of California energy projects depend largely on the price of petroleum and natural gas, the key fuels for the state's energy systems. Recent high prices for oil and gas have closed the cost gap between conventional power plants and environmentally friendly but more expensive alternative energy sources, such as solar and fuel cell units.
High prices for electricity, heating fuel and gasoline have also irritated consumers, and increased the urgency with which politicians and energy companies pursue projects to boost energy supplies. "We need all the energy we can get from every available stream," Zygocki said.
The completed postal project is part of a $47 million program to upgrade energy systems at Northern California postal facilities -- including Oakland, Berkeley and Livermore -- by Chevron Energy Solutions, a small energy-consulting subsidiary that Chevron acquired from PG&E in 2000.
While Chevron Energy Solutions' $200 million business doesn't rate its own line in the income statements of its parent, which posted a profit of $14.1 billion on revenue of $198.2 billion in 2005, a stellar lineup of top government officials turned out to hail its work.
Stephen Johnson, administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, traveled from Washington to speak at the unveiling of a project whose 0.5 megawatt of power capacity would cover only a tiny sliver of California's 55,000-megawatt peak demand. Johnson used the occasion to reaffirm President Bush's recent promise to cut oil consumption. "America is too reliant on foreign energy and the best way to break this dependency is through innovative technology," Johnson said.
The EPA chief also embraced the green character of the project: "What's good for the environment is also a good use for our energy dollars."
The U.S. Postal Service rounded up the money for this project by combining $8.3 million from energy savings, $4 million set aside to phase out refrigeration chemicals that hurt the ozone layer, a $2.3 million subsidy funded by California utility customers and $250,000 from the Defense Department.
Terry Tamminen, a special assistant to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, showed up to remind the audience of that administration's commitment to hydrogen as a transportation fuel, renewable energy, adequate power supplies, energy efficient buildings and lower greenhouse gas emissions. He pointed to the new project as "the epitome" of that administration's support for public-private partnerships.
Schwarzenegger himself was in Los Angeles on Friday to announce a $1 billion project that would use oil refinery waste products to produce hydrogen fuel for a 500-megawatt power plant and then pipe the carbon dioxide emissions from that process to Central California to inject and boost output in aging oil fields.
But that more ambitious project won't be pursued unless feasibility studies show it to be viable, said Doug McFarlan, a spokesman for Edison International, a Southern California utility holding company that is undertaking the experiment with BP, the London-based oil company. McFarlan acknowledged that at $2 a watt the power plant would be much more expensive than a conventional unit, but he said that other factors, including fuel cost savings or revenue from carbon dioxide sales, could close that gap.
But public support for alternative energy has proved fickle in the past. Perhaps anticipating a day when the photo opportunities have faded and economic realities have changed, U.S. Postal Service Senior Vice President Thomas Day pointed to one ultimate saving grace for his company's new power source: "If there is a blackout, the lights at the San Francisco Distribution and Power Center will stay on."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Jurgens covers energy and business. Reach him at 925-943-8088 or at rjurgens@cctimes.com.
This story was changed after initial posting to
Inside Bay Area - Alameda Times-Star - Op-Ed
THE FRESHEST and, for some, most encouraging part of President Bush's lackluster State of the Union address and budget was the proposal to increase federal spending on alternative energy research by 22 percent.
Our nation, Bush posited, is "addicted to oil" — an admission that can't come easily for an administration whose top two officeholders are beneficiaries of the industry.
The fund increase is part of Bush's avowed goal of cutting our dependence on Middle Eastern petroleum imports by 75 percent in the next 20 years. Particularly favored are the development of solar energy and biofuels, as well as taking a new look at reviving the use of nuclear power plants. But increased funds for coal-powered plants, wind energy, hydrogen fuel cells and batteries for hybrid cars also are part of the proposal.
The money is intended to be not an end-all but a catalyst for increased investments in alternative energy by private industry. Hopefully they'll take the bait.
Such investment is long overdue but must be sustained. The tipping point of peak world oil production is expected to occur within the next 20 years. Some say it's already happened.
Meanwhile, international competition for oil and natural gas has increased dramatically, with China and India at the forefront. Demand is expected to jump 50 percent within the next 20 years, and our nation no longer enjoys the relative monopoly it did for more than a century. It's a finite resource, and some experts contend we could deplete supplies of easy-to-retrieve, relatively cheap oil within 40 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of which could seriously erode our fossil-fueled quality of life, economic base, production of modern conveniences and easy mobility. At worst, we could be headed for a period of "generalized and chronic (economic, political and social) contraction," James Howard Kunstler says in his compelling but somber book "The Long Emergency."
We currently have no good alternatives to oil and natural gas. It's vital that we invest in developing some. Our future depends on it.
So, has the Bush administration finally gotten religion on alternative energy, or is it playing politics with an issue that is key to the world's future?
The proof will be seen in the length and depth of our commitment. UC Berkeley Nobel laureate Steve Chu and Stanford biologist Cliff Summerville indicate that our dedication needs to be sustained for 15 years or more.
It's comparable to the space race. To start such an undertaking and then say "no" a few years later would be farcical.
Now that it's made this commitment to alternative energy, the Bush administration — and its successors — must sustain the effort to fuel such options.
We can't afford to dabble in alternative fuels and then abort the venture — as we did in the 1970s. This time, that could be a disastrous.
THE FRESHEST and, for some, most encouraging part of President Bush's lackluster State of the Union address and budget was the proposal to increase federal spending on alternative energy research by 22 percent.
Our nation, Bush posited, is "addicted to oil" — an admission that can't come easily for an administration whose top two officeholders are beneficiaries of the industry.
The fund increase is part of Bush's avowed goal of cutting our dependence on Middle Eastern petroleum imports by 75 percent in the next 20 years. Particularly favored are the development of solar energy and biofuels, as well as taking a new look at reviving the use of nuclear power plants. But increased funds for coal-powered plants, wind energy, hydrogen fuel cells and batteries for hybrid cars also are part of the proposal.
The money is intended to be not an end-all but a catalyst for increased investments in alternative energy by private industry. Hopefully they'll take the bait.
Such investment is long overdue but must be sustained. The tipping point of peak world oil production is expected to occur within the next 20 years. Some say it's already happened.
Meanwhile, international competition for oil and natural gas has increased dramatically, with China and India at the forefront. Demand is expected to jump 50 percent within the next 20 years, and our nation no longer enjoys the relative monopoly it did for more than a century. It's a finite resource, and some experts contend we could deplete supplies of easy-to-retrieve, relatively cheap oil within 40 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of which could seriously erode our fossil-fueled quality of life, economic base, production of modern conveniences and easy mobility. At worst, we could be headed for a period of "generalized and chronic (economic, political and social) contraction," James Howard Kunstler says in his compelling but somber book "The Long Emergency."
We currently have no good alternatives to oil and natural gas. It's vital that we invest in developing some. Our future depends on it.
So, has the Bush administration finally gotten religion on alternative energy, or is it playing politics with an issue that is key to the world's future?
The proof will be seen in the length and depth of our commitment. UC Berkeley Nobel laureate Steve Chu and Stanford biologist Cliff Summerville indicate that our dedication needs to be sustained for 15 years or more.
It's comparable to the space race. To start such an undertaking and then say "no" a few years later would be farcical.
Now that it's made this commitment to alternative energy, the Bush administration — and its successors — must sustain the effort to fuel such options.
We can't afford to dabble in alternative fuels and then abort the venture — as we did in the 1970s. This time, that could be a disastrous.
Rich nations seek stable energy supply - Breaking News - Business - Breaking News
Finance ministers of the world's wealthiest nations complained about high oil prices at talks in Russia on Saturday but said they still believed economic growth would be good again this year.
Ministers from the Group of Eight industrialised countries said in a communique that global growth remained strong but that high and volatile energy prices posed a threat. They also called for more progress in trade liberalisation negotiations.
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Rodrigo Rato, present at the talks, said high energy prices seemed to be the result of supply problems as well as high demand.
The meeting in icy Moscow marked Russia's first turn as G8 president and focused primarily on concern over the cost and reliability of supplies of oil and gas.
As ministers signed off the communique and headed to lunch with President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin, Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin was quoted by Russian RIA-Novosti news agency as saying that the talks had at times been "stormy".
It was not immediately clear whether Kudrin was referring to tension over energy supply or other issues at the meeting, such as Russian repayment of foreign debts and aid for the world's poorest countries.
ENERGY SUPPLY WOES
Russia is one of the world's biggest oil and gas suppliers but a recent row with Ukraine, in which it closed the gas taps, has triggered ill-ease among others in the G8 club - which comprises the United States, Japan, Canada, Germany, Italy, Britain, France as well as Russia.
The diplomatically phrased communique made no reference to that issue but officials said they are keen for Russia itself to allow more foreign investment in its energy sector and to loosen the grip of the monopoly supplier Gazprom.
The finance ministers kicked off their talks over breakfast with their opposite numbers from some of the rising stars of the world economy, China, India, Brazil and South Africa.
China's breakneck expansion rate, more than twice the pace of the world in general, has also made it the world's second largest consumer after the United States of oil.
Rising demand has doubled oil prices in the past two years but another major worry is securing reliable supplies of energy from regions often prone to instability.
The standoff with oil-rich Iran serves as a reminder of how vulnerable supplies can be, as did the Russia-Ukraine spat over how much the latter paid for gas.
RUSSIA RESISTS
Russia has declared energy security a priority of its annual G8 presidency, but is being asked to prove it is serious after cutting gas exports to Ukraine and Western Europe at the start of 2006.
Russia's number two oil official Sergei Oganesyan was quick to dismiss the idea of an end to Gazprom's monopoly before the G8 ministers even arrived in the Russian capital. "There is and there will continue to be a monopoly," he told Reuters.
Pressure could mount though, with another meeting scheduled for March among energy ministers.
Gazprom does not allow others to export gas to Europe or to even produce more than it is prepared to accept in trunk pipelines, all of which are under its control.
For Putin, the presidency of the G8 is a celebration of his country's transformation after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but the other finance ministers still do not consider Russia an equal, mindful that it went to the brink of financial ruin and debt default in 1998 even if it is rich in oil and gas.
© 2006 AAP
Brought to you by
Finance ministers of the world's wealthiest nations complained about high oil prices at talks in Russia on Saturday but said they still believed economic growth would be good again this year.
Ministers from the Group of Eight industrialised countries said in a communique that global growth remained strong but that high and volatile energy prices posed a threat. They also called for more progress in trade liberalisation negotiations.
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Rodrigo Rato, present at the talks, said high energy prices seemed to be the result of supply problems as well as high demand.
The meeting in icy Moscow marked Russia's first turn as G8 president and focused primarily on concern over the cost and reliability of supplies of oil and gas.
As ministers signed off the communique and headed to lunch with President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin, Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin was quoted by Russian RIA-Novosti news agency as saying that the talks had at times been "stormy".
It was not immediately clear whether Kudrin was referring to tension over energy supply or other issues at the meeting, such as Russian repayment of foreign debts and aid for the world's poorest countries.
ENERGY SUPPLY WOES
Russia is one of the world's biggest oil and gas suppliers but a recent row with Ukraine, in which it closed the gas taps, has triggered ill-ease among others in the G8 club - which comprises the United States, Japan, Canada, Germany, Italy, Britain, France as well as Russia.
The diplomatically phrased communique made no reference to that issue but officials said they are keen for Russia itself to allow more foreign investment in its energy sector and to loosen the grip of the monopoly supplier Gazprom.
The finance ministers kicked off their talks over breakfast with their opposite numbers from some of the rising stars of the world economy, China, India, Brazil and South Africa.
China's breakneck expansion rate, more than twice the pace of the world in general, has also made it the world's second largest consumer after the United States of oil.
Rising demand has doubled oil prices in the past two years but another major worry is securing reliable supplies of energy from regions often prone to instability.
The standoff with oil-rich Iran serves as a reminder of how vulnerable supplies can be, as did the Russia-Ukraine spat over how much the latter paid for gas.
RUSSIA RESISTS
Russia has declared energy security a priority of its annual G8 presidency, but is being asked to prove it is serious after cutting gas exports to Ukraine and Western Europe at the start of 2006.
Russia's number two oil official Sergei Oganesyan was quick to dismiss the idea of an end to Gazprom's monopoly before the G8 ministers even arrived in the Russian capital. "There is and there will continue to be a monopoly," he told Reuters.
Pressure could mount though, with another meeting scheduled for March among energy ministers.
Gazprom does not allow others to export gas to Europe or to even produce more than it is prepared to accept in trunk pipelines, all of which are under its control.
For Putin, the presidency of the G8 is a celebration of his country's transformation after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but the other finance ministers still do not consider Russia an equal, mindful that it went to the brink of financial ruin and debt default in 1998 even if it is rich in oil and gas.
© 2006 AAP
Brought to you by
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
US nuclear waste strategies evaluated
Methods planned for transporting radioactive spent fuel from nuclear power reactors are generally safe, but questions remain over the safety of nuclear casks in the event of a sustained, hot fire, a review panel of the US National Academy of Sciences has concluded.
The NAS report released in Washington DC on Thursday, found there are "no fundamental technical barriers" to safe transportation, but that a number of "serious challenges" remain.
Assuming no new plants are built, disposing of fuel from the US's 112 operating plants will require a two-decade-long programme of daily shipments, and more planning needs to be done for managing this massive operation, the report says.
The report assessed the adequacy of planning for every kind of accident scenario, but not the potential for deliberate acts such as terrorist attacks. To evaluate that aspect, it says, would require creation of a new committee with full access to classified materials.
Trains versus trucks
There are several main scenarios under consideration for moving the 54,000 tonnes of high-level radioactive waste from the US's 103 nuclear power plants, and a similar amount from military weapons-production plants. One is the movement to their ultimate repository, proposed as the Yucca Mountain facility in Nevada. Another is transport to an interim storage spot or possibly to reprocessing facilities.
The material could be moved in an estimated 55,000 truckloads, or in 9600 dedicated trainloads and just 1000 truckloads, they say. The multidisciplinary panel "much preferred the rail option", says Neal Lane, its chairman, both because of the greatly reduced number of trips and because the rail lines are less subject to disruptions, such as traffic jams.
Research on the strength of the planned containment vessels or casks – which included dropping them from aeroplanes and slamming into them in simulated railroad crossing collisions – assures that they would survive any likely accident or natural disaster, except for the contingency of a very hot fire sustained over a long period, the report says.
Structural issues
Such fires have occurred, for example, in at least two cases where trains of petroleum-filled tanker cars burned for days before being controlled. The only way to minimise that risk for now, the panel concluded, is to make sure petroleum-carrying trains never get close to nuclear waste trains, but more research should be done on the effects of such fires on the nuclear casks.
More research is also needed on other points, such as the best ways of organising and coordinating the shipments, the panel says.
"There are significant questions" about the performance of the Department of Energy agency running the programme right now, panel member Seth Tuler told New Scientist. The report concludes that "changing the organisational structure for this programme will improve its chances for success".
Methods planned for transporting radioactive spent fuel from nuclear power reactors are generally safe, but questions remain over the safety of nuclear casks in the event of a sustained, hot fire, a review panel of the US National Academy of Sciences has concluded.
The NAS report released in Washington DC on Thursday, found there are "no fundamental technical barriers" to safe transportation, but that a number of "serious challenges" remain.
Assuming no new plants are built, disposing of fuel from the US's 112 operating plants will require a two-decade-long programme of daily shipments, and more planning needs to be done for managing this massive operation, the report says.
The report assessed the adequacy of planning for every kind of accident scenario, but not the potential for deliberate acts such as terrorist attacks. To evaluate that aspect, it says, would require creation of a new committee with full access to classified materials.
Trains versus trucks
There are several main scenarios under consideration for moving the 54,000 tonnes of high-level radioactive waste from the US's 103 nuclear power plants, and a similar amount from military weapons-production plants. One is the movement to their ultimate repository, proposed as the Yucca Mountain facility in Nevada. Another is transport to an interim storage spot or possibly to reprocessing facilities.
The material could be moved in an estimated 55,000 truckloads, or in 9600 dedicated trainloads and just 1000 truckloads, they say. The multidisciplinary panel "much preferred the rail option", says Neal Lane, its chairman, both because of the greatly reduced number of trips and because the rail lines are less subject to disruptions, such as traffic jams.
Research on the strength of the planned containment vessels or casks – which included dropping them from aeroplanes and slamming into them in simulated railroad crossing collisions – assures that they would survive any likely accident or natural disaster, except for the contingency of a very hot fire sustained over a long period, the report says.
Structural issues
Such fires have occurred, for example, in at least two cases where trains of petroleum-filled tanker cars burned for days before being controlled. The only way to minimise that risk for now, the panel concluded, is to make sure petroleum-carrying trains never get close to nuclear waste trains, but more research should be done on the effects of such fires on the nuclear casks.
More research is also needed on other points, such as the best ways of organising and coordinating the shipments, the panel says.
"There are significant questions" about the performance of the Department of Energy agency running the programme right now, panel member Seth Tuler told New Scientist. The report concludes that "changing the organisational structure for this programme will improve its chances for success".
U.S. May Yet Lose Billions on Oil, Gas - Yahoo! News: "The Interior Department estimates that as much as $66 billion worth of oil and natural gas taken from the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico between now and 2011 will be exempt from government royalty payments.
That could amount to the government losing an estimated $7 billion to $9.5 billion based on anticipated production and current price projections for oil and gas, according to an analysis in the department's five-year budget plan.
The analysis assumes oil prices will hover around $50 a barrel and natural gas in the $8 to $9 per thousand cubic feet range between now and 2012.
Johnnie Burton, head of the department's Minerals Management Service, said Tuesday the actual revenue losses would be subject to many variables, but that more than $7 billion was 'in the range' of probability.
The industry windfall was first reported by The New York Times.
The disclosure prompted calls in Congress on Tuesday to curtail or end the royalty relief that lawmakers made available in 1995.
'The American people are getting stood up and hung out to dry by an administration that favors sweetheart deals with Big Oil,' said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., one of six Democrats who said they planned to introduce legislation to end the royalty relief.
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said he planned to introduce a resolution putting the Senate on record against the royalty break. 'No one in their right mind think oil companies turning record high profits and squeezing Americans at the pump should now get to keep $7 billion,' Kerry said.
Although Kerry was among those who voted for the royalty relief in 1995, his spokeswoman said that the relief is no longer needed when oil prices are near $60 a barrel.
Oil cost an average of $18.43 a barrel in 1995, according"
That could amount to the government losing an estimated $7 billion to $9.5 billion based on anticipated production and current price projections for oil and gas, according to an analysis in the department's five-year budget plan.
The analysis assumes oil prices will hover around $50 a barrel and natural gas in the $8 to $9 per thousand cubic feet range between now and 2012.
Johnnie Burton, head of the department's Minerals Management Service, said Tuesday the actual revenue losses would be subject to many variables, but that more than $7 billion was 'in the range' of probability.
The industry windfall was first reported by The New York Times.
The disclosure prompted calls in Congress on Tuesday to curtail or end the royalty relief that lawmakers made available in 1995.
'The American people are getting stood up and hung out to dry by an administration that favors sweetheart deals with Big Oil,' said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., one of six Democrats who said they planned to introduce legislation to end the royalty relief.
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said he planned to introduce a resolution putting the Senate on record against the royalty break. 'No one in their right mind think oil companies turning record high profits and squeezing Americans at the pump should now get to keep $7 billion,' Kerry said.
Although Kerry was among those who voted for the royalty relief in 1995, his spokeswoman said that the relief is no longer needed when oil prices are near $60 a barrel.
Oil cost an average of $18.43 a barrel in 1995, according"
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
DALLAS (Reuters) - President Bush's call for the United States to end its dependence on Middle East oil has become "the topic of the hour" for Saudi Arabia and left the it wondering what the White House has in mind, the Saudi ambassador to the United States said on Tuesday.
Prince Turki Al-Faisal said the Saudis were talking with the Bush administration about the president's January 31 State of the Union speech in which he said the U.S. was "addicted to oil" and should cut Mideast oil imports by 75 percent by 2025.
"This is the topic of the hour for us. We are talking to the U.S. administration on exactly where they plan to go with this," Faisal said a speech in Dallas. "I hope there will be more discussion between us and the U.S. administration because this is an issue of prime importance."
"Oil is our bread and butter, at least for the time being, and so any decisions by such an important partner as the United States affects us and makes us concerned about where we are going," he said.
In his speech, Bush said: "America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world."
The goal, he said, is to use technology to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy, and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past."
Prince Turki Al-Faisal said the Saudis were talking with the Bush administration about the president's January 31 State of the Union speech in which he said the U.S. was "addicted to oil" and should cut Mideast oil imports by 75 percent by 2025.
"This is the topic of the hour for us. We are talking to the U.S. administration on exactly where they plan to go with this," Faisal said a speech in Dallas. "I hope there will be more discussion between us and the U.S. administration because this is an issue of prime importance."
"Oil is our bread and butter, at least for the time being, and so any decisions by such an important partner as the United States affects us and makes us concerned about where we are going," he said.
In his speech, Bush said: "America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world."
The goal, he said, is to use technology to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy, and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past."
BP's record profit disappoints City
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
BP's record profit disappoints City
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
Article continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lord Browne, BP's chief executive, was upbeat about the results, which saw the group deliver record cash flow as well as record profits, slash its gearing to 17%, and for the 13th successive year replace 100% of its production with new proven reserves. "Our 2005 result was a record; this reflects the quality of our asset base and operations. Strong operating cash flows and ... disposals have enabled record distributions to shareholders."
Over the past three years BP has returned $40bn to shareholders, a return that could rise to up to $65bn in the next three years.
However, Richard Hunter, equities head at the stockbrokers Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "BP's profits of £11bn underperformed both Royal Dutch Shell's £13bn and Exxon's £20bn, not to mention market expectations." The combination of the reserves replacement programme and the expected distribution to shareholders meant, however, that the market consensus remained "overwhelmingly positive towards what is still seen as the pick of the oil majors".
The level of the profits enjoyed by oil companies has attracted increasing criticism and yesterday Tony Woodley, general secretary of the Transport & General Workers Union, called for some of the money to be used to support the Finance Assistance Scheme, the pensions lifeboat.
Mr Woodley said: "At a stroke we could bolster that scheme and sort out the injustice of decent people having lost their pensions through no fault of their own. The oil companies' windfall should help those people, for we can be sure the shareholders will be looked after anyway."
Earlier Lord Browne had rejected suggestions that the firm was making excess profits. The money BP made went either to investment in the business or to shareholders. "BP distributes £1 out of every £6 that goes into UK pension funds via the dividend. That's rather important." While 96% of BP's profits were generated outside Britain, more than half the company's shares were held in the UK. Yesterday the shares fell 18p to 647.5p.
Lord Browne was scathing about the accounting changes the company had had to bring in under international financial reporting standards. "Some would argue that IFRS neither produces a record of the accountability of management nor a measure of the changes in the economic value of assets and liabilities. I would agree with them. What IFRS actually does is to make our results more difficult to understand."
BP believed there was good medium-term support for oil prices to stay above $40 a barrel and that the supply industry's vulnerability to "significant supply disruption" remained high. BP's strong portfolio of assets meant it would continue to increase production organically at that price level, though Lord Browne appeared unenthusiastic about acquisitions.
Backstory
With the other big oil firms, BP may be cashing in on high prices but its chief executive, Lord Browne, insists 2005's record performance had its origins in days of much lower prices. Brent crude averaged $54.42 a barrel in the final quarter of last year, 42% higher than in the same period in 2004. Prices below $20 a barrel, as in 2001 and 2002, seem a distant memory. But Lord Browne says the results are rooted in that era of low oil prices, and through sustained investment and performance improvements.
Special reports
Oil and petrol
Useful links
Opec
International Energy Agency
American Petroleum Institute
Energy Institute
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
BP's record profit disappoints City
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
Article continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lord Browne, BP's chief executive, was upbeat about the results, which saw the group deliver record cash flow as well as record profits, slash its gearing to 17%, and for the 13th successive year replace 100% of its production with new proven reserves. "Our 2005 result was a record; this reflects the quality of our asset base and operations. Strong operating cash flows and ... disposals have enabled record distributions to shareholders."
Over the past three years BP has returned $40bn to shareholders, a return that could rise to up to $65bn in the next three years.
However, Richard Hunter, equities head at the stockbrokers Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "BP's profits of £11bn underperformed both Royal Dutch Shell's £13bn and Exxon's £20bn, not to mention market expectations." The combination of the reserves replacement programme and the expected distribution to shareholders meant, however, that the market consensus remained "overwhelmingly positive towards what is still seen as the pick of the oil majors".
The level of the profits enjoyed by oil companies has attracted increasing criticism and yesterday Tony Woodley, general secretary of the Transport & General Workers Union, called for some of the money to be used to support the Finance Assistance Scheme, the pensions lifeboat.
Mr Woodley said: "At a stroke we could bolster that scheme and sort out the injustice of decent people having lost their pensions through no fault of their own. The oil companies' windfall should help those people, for we can be sure the shareholders will be looked after anyway."
Earlier Lord Browne had rejected suggestions that the firm was making excess profits. The money BP made went either to investment in the business or to shareholders. "BP distributes £1 out of every £6 that goes into UK pension funds via the dividend. That's rather important." While 96% of BP's profits were generated outside Britain, more than half the company's shares were held in the UK. Yesterday the shares fell 18p to 647.5p.
Lord Browne was scathing about the accounting changes the company had had to bring in under international financial reporting standards. "Some would argue that IFRS neither produces a record of the accountability of management nor a measure of the changes in the economic value of assets and liabilities. I would agree with them. What IFRS actually does is to make our results more difficult to understand."
BP believed there was good medium-term support for oil prices to stay above $40 a barrel and that the supply industry's vulnerability to "significant supply disruption" remained high. BP's strong portfolio of assets meant it would continue to increase production organically at that price level, though Lord Browne appeared unenthusiastic about acquisitions.
Backstory
With the other big oil firms, BP may be cashing in on high prices but its chief executive, Lord Browne, insists 2005's record performance had its origins in days of much lower prices. Brent crude averaged $54.42 a barrel in the final quarter of last year, 42% higher than in the same period in 2004. Prices below $20 a barrel, as in 2001 and 2002, seem a distant memory. But Lord Browne says the results are rooted in that era of low oil prices, and through sustained investment and performance improvements.
Special reports
Oil and petrol
Useful links
Opec
International Energy Agency
American Petroleum Institute
Energy Institute
BP's record profit disappoints City
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
BP's record profit disappoints City
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
Article continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lord Browne, BP's chief executive, was upbeat about the results, which saw the group deliver record cash flow as well as record profits, slash its gearing to 17%, and for the 13th successive year replace 100% of its production with new proven reserves. "Our 2005 result was a record; this reflects the quality of our asset base and operations. Strong operating cash flows and ... disposals have enabled record distributions to shareholders."
Over the past three years BP has returned $40bn to shareholders, a return that could rise to up to $65bn in the next three years.
However, Richard Hunter, equities head at the stockbrokers Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "BP's profits of £11bn underperformed both Royal Dutch Shell's £13bn and Exxon's £20bn, not to mention market expectations." The combination of the reserves replacement programme and the expected distribution to shareholders meant, however, that the market consensus remained "overwhelmingly positive towards what is still seen as the pick of the oil majors".
The level of the profits enjoyed by oil companies has attracted increasing criticism and yesterday Tony Woodley, general secretary of the Transport & General Workers Union, called for some of the money to be used to support the Finance Assistance Scheme, the pensions lifeboat.
Mr Woodley said: "At a stroke we could bolster that scheme and sort out the injustice of decent people having lost their pensions through no fault of their own. The oil companies' windfall should help those people, for we can be sure the shareholders will be looked after anyway."
Earlier Lord Browne had rejected suggestions that the firm was making excess profits. The money BP made went either to investment in the business or to shareholders. "BP distributes £1 out of every £6 that goes into UK pension funds via the dividend. That's rather important." While 96% of BP's profits were generated outside Britain, more than half the company's shares were held in the UK. Yesterday the shares fell 18p to 647.5p.
Lord Browne was scathing about the accounting changes the company had had to bring in under international financial reporting standards. "Some would argue that IFRS neither produces a record of the accountability of management nor a measure of the changes in the economic value of assets and liabilities. I would agree with them. What IFRS actually does is to make our results more difficult to understand."
BP believed there was good medium-term support for oil prices to stay above $40 a barrel and that the supply industry's vulnerability to "significant supply disruption" remained high. BP's strong portfolio of assets meant it would continue to increase production organically at that price level, though Lord Browne appeared unenthusiastic about acquisitions.
Backstory
With the other big oil firms, BP may be cashing in on high prices but its chief executive, Lord Browne, insists 2005's record performance had its origins in days of much lower prices. Brent crude averaged $54.42 a barrel in the final quarter of last year, 42% higher than in the same period in 2004. Prices below $20 a barrel, as in 2001 and 2002, seem a distant memory. But Lord Browne says the results are rooted in that era of low oil prices, and through sustained investment and performance improvements.
Special reports
Oil and petrol
Useful links
Opec
International Energy Agency
American Petroleum Institute
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
BP's record profit disappoints City
· £11bn profit overshadowed by rivals' performance
· Lord Browne defends 'quality of asset base'
Mark Milner, industrial editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
BP yesterday announced record profits of $19.3bn (£11bn), driven by the high oil price, but the 25% increase fell short of City expectations and the world's second largest oil firm by market value saw its shares fall in response.
Weakness in the final quarter of 2005 left BP's refining and marketing business $160m in the red - compared with its $1.3bn profit in the last three months of 2004. The company blamed a combination of its Texas City refinery being closed, the $500m spent on boosting efficiency in Europe, and the changes to the way BP has to account for long-term North Sea contracts.
Article continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lord Browne, BP's chief executive, was upbeat about the results, which saw the group deliver record cash flow as well as record profits, slash its gearing to 17%, and for the 13th successive year replace 100% of its production with new proven reserves. "Our 2005 result was a record; this reflects the quality of our asset base and operations. Strong operating cash flows and ... disposals have enabled record distributions to shareholders."
Over the past three years BP has returned $40bn to shareholders, a return that could rise to up to $65bn in the next three years.
However, Richard Hunter, equities head at the stockbrokers Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "BP's profits of £11bn underperformed both Royal Dutch Shell's £13bn and Exxon's £20bn, not to mention market expectations." The combination of the reserves replacement programme and the expected distribution to shareholders meant, however, that the market consensus remained "overwhelmingly positive towards what is still seen as the pick of the oil majors".
The level of the profits enjoyed by oil companies has attracted increasing criticism and yesterday Tony Woodley, general secretary of the Transport & General Workers Union, called for some of the money to be used to support the Finance Assistance Scheme, the pensions lifeboat.
Mr Woodley said: "At a stroke we could bolster that scheme and sort out the injustice of decent people having lost their pensions through no fault of their own. The oil companies' windfall should help those people, for we can be sure the shareholders will be looked after anyway."
Earlier Lord Browne had rejected suggestions that the firm was making excess profits. The money BP made went either to investment in the business or to shareholders. "BP distributes £1 out of every £6 that goes into UK pension funds via the dividend. That's rather important." While 96% of BP's profits were generated outside Britain, more than half the company's shares were held in the UK. Yesterday the shares fell 18p to 647.5p.
Lord Browne was scathing about the accounting changes the company had had to bring in under international financial reporting standards. "Some would argue that IFRS neither produces a record of the accountability of management nor a measure of the changes in the economic value of assets and liabilities. I would agree with them. What IFRS actually does is to make our results more difficult to understand."
BP believed there was good medium-term support for oil prices to stay above $40 a barrel and that the supply industry's vulnerability to "significant supply disruption" remained high. BP's strong portfolio of assets meant it would continue to increase production organically at that price level, though Lord Browne appeared unenthusiastic about acquisitions.
Backstory
With the other big oil firms, BP may be cashing in on high prices but its chief executive, Lord Browne, insists 2005's record performance had its origins in days of much lower prices. Brent crude averaged $54.42 a barrel in the final quarter of last year, 42% higher than in the same period in 2004. Prices below $20 a barrel, as in 2001 and 2002, seem a distant memory. But Lord Browne says the results are rooted in that era of low oil prices, and through sustained investment and performance improvements.
Special reports
Oil and petrol
Useful links
Opec
International Energy Agency
American Petroleum Institute
Sweden plans to be world's first oil-free economy
· 15-year limit set for switch to renewable energy
· Biofuels favoured over further nuclear power
John Vidal, environment editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
Sweden is to take the biggest energy step of any advanced western economy by trying to wean itself off oil completely within 15 years - without building a new generation of nuclear power stations.
The attempt by the country of 9 million people to become the world's first practically oil-free economy is being planned by a committee of industrialists, academics, farmers, car makers, civil servants and others, who will report to parliament in several months.
The intention, the Swedish government said yesterday, is to replace all fossil fuels with renewables before climate change destroys economies and growing oil scarcity leads to huge new price rises.
"Our dependency on oil should be broken by 2020," said Mona Sahlin, minister of sustainable development. "There shall always be better alternatives to oil, which means no house should need oil for heating, and no driver should need to turn solely to gasoline."
According to the energy committee of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, there is growing concern that global oil supplies are peaking and will shortly dwindle, and that a global economic recession could result from high oil prices.
Ms Sahlin has described oil dependency as one of the greatest problems facing the world. "A Sweden free of fossil fuels would give us enormous advantages, not least by reducing the impact from fluctuations in oil prices," she said. "The price of oil has tripled since 1996."
A government official said: "We want to be both mentally and technically prepared for a world without oil. The plan is a response to global climate change, rising petroleum prices and warnings by some experts that the world may soon be running out of oil."
Sweden, which was badly hit by the oil price rises in the 1970s, now gets almost all its electricity from nuclear and hydroelectric power, and relies on fossil fuels mainly for transport. Almost all its heating has been converted in the past decade to schemes which distribute steam or hot water generated by geothermal energy or waste heat. A 1980 referendum decided that nuclear power should be phased out, but this has still not been finalised.
The decision to abandon oil puts Sweden at the top of the world green league table. Iceland hopes by 2050 to power all its cars and boats with hydrogen made from electricity drawn from renewable resources, and Brazil intends to power 80% of its transport fleet with ethanol derived mainly from sugar cane within five years.
Last week George Bush surprised analysts by saying that the US was addicted to oil and should greatly reduce imports from the Middle East. The US now plans a large increase in nuclear power.
The British government, which is committed to generating 10% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2012, last month launched an energy review which has a specific remit to consider a large increase in nuclear power. But a report by accountants Ernst & Young yesterday said that the UK was falling behind in its attempt to meet its renewables target.
"The UK has Europe's best wind, wave and tidal resources yet it continues to miss out on its economic potential," said Jonathan Johns, head of renewable energy at Ernst & Young.
Energy ministry officials in Sweden said they expected the oil committee to recommend further development of biofuels derived from its massive forests, and by expanding other renewable energies such as wind and wave power.
Sweden has a head start over most countries. In 2003, 26% of all the energy consumed came from renewable sources - the EU average is 6%. Only 32% of the energy came from oil - down from 77% in 1970.
The Swedish government is working with carmakers Saab and Volvo to develop cars and lorries that burn ethanol and other biofuels. Last year the Swedish energy agency said it planned to get the public sector to move out of oil. Its health and library services are being given grants to convert from oil use and homeowners are being encouraged with green taxes. The paper and pulp industries use bark to produce energy, and sawmills burn wood chips and sawdust to generate power.
Special reports
Oil and petrol
Useful links
Opec
International Energy Agency
American Petroleum Institute
Energy Institute
Advertiser links
UK Atkins, Carbolite and Others...
Need chocolate, biscuits, cakes, bread, sweets? Make sure...
sugarfreesuperstore.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Printable version | Send it to a friend | Save story
· 15-year limit set for switch to renewable energy
· Biofuels favoured over further nuclear power
John Vidal, environment editor
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian
Sweden is to take the biggest energy step of any advanced western economy by trying to wean itself off oil completely within 15 years - without building a new generation of nuclear power stations.
The attempt by the country of 9 million people to become the world's first practically oil-free economy is being planned by a committee of industrialists, academics, farmers, car makers, civil servants and others, who will report to parliament in several months.
The intention, the Swedish government said yesterday, is to replace all fossil fuels with renewables before climate change destroys economies and growing oil scarcity leads to huge new price rises.
"Our dependency on oil should be broken by 2020," said Mona Sahlin, minister of sustainable development. "There shall always be better alternatives to oil, which means no house should need oil for heating, and no driver should need to turn solely to gasoline."
According to the energy committee of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, there is growing concern that global oil supplies are peaking and will shortly dwindle, and that a global economic recession could result from high oil prices.
Ms Sahlin has described oil dependency as one of the greatest problems facing the world. "A Sweden free of fossil fuels would give us enormous advantages, not least by reducing the impact from fluctuations in oil prices," she said. "The price of oil has tripled since 1996."
A government official said: "We want to be both mentally and technically prepared for a world without oil. The plan is a response to global climate change, rising petroleum prices and warnings by some experts that the world may soon be running out of oil."
Sweden, which was badly hit by the oil price rises in the 1970s, now gets almost all its electricity from nuclear and hydroelectric power, and relies on fossil fuels mainly for transport. Almost all its heating has been converted in the past decade to schemes which distribute steam or hot water generated by geothermal energy or waste heat. A 1980 referendum decided that nuclear power should be phased out, but this has still not been finalised.
The decision to abandon oil puts Sweden at the top of the world green league table. Iceland hopes by 2050 to power all its cars and boats with hydrogen made from electricity drawn from renewable resources, and Brazil intends to power 80% of its transport fleet with ethanol derived mainly from sugar cane within five years.
Last week George Bush surprised analysts by saying that the US was addicted to oil and should greatly reduce imports from the Middle East. The US now plans a large increase in nuclear power.
The British government, which is committed to generating 10% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2012, last month launched an energy review which has a specific remit to consider a large increase in nuclear power. But a report by accountants Ernst & Young yesterday said that the UK was falling behind in its attempt to meet its renewables target.
"The UK has Europe's best wind, wave and tidal resources yet it continues to miss out on its economic potential," said Jonathan Johns, head of renewable energy at Ernst & Young.
Energy ministry officials in Sweden said they expected the oil committee to recommend further development of biofuels derived from its massive forests, and by expanding other renewable energies such as wind and wave power.
Sweden has a head start over most countries. In 2003, 26% of all the energy consumed came from renewable sources - the EU average is 6%. Only 32% of the energy came from oil - down from 77% in 1970.
The Swedish government is working with carmakers Saab and Volvo to develop cars and lorries that burn ethanol and other biofuels. Last year the Swedish energy agency said it planned to get the public sector to move out of oil. Its health and library services are being given grants to convert from oil use and homeowners are being encouraged with green taxes. The paper and pulp industries use bark to produce energy, and sawmills burn wood chips and sawdust to generate power.
Special reports
Oil and petrol
Useful links
Opec
International Energy Agency
American Petroleum Institute
Energy Institute
Advertiser links
UK Atkins, Carbolite and Others...
Need chocolate, biscuits, cakes, bread, sweets? Make sure...
sugarfreesuperstore.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Printable version | Send it to a friend | Save story
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Oil trade seen cushioning US-Venezuela spat
CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) - A barrage of insults and two foreign staff expulsions have knocked U.S.-Venezuelan relations to a new low, but the pair's mutually vital oil trade should act as a collision buffer, analysts say.
Already icy relations worsened last week after the U.S.-bashing Hugo Chavez expelled a U.S. naval attache on spying allegations and the State Department responded by ordering out a Venezuelan diplomat. Exiled diplomat Jeny Figueredo arrived back in Caracas to cheering crowds on Monday.
"Relations are probably at their lowest point. Things have gotten very bad. The two governments are on a collision course," said Michael Shifter, a Latin American analyst at the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based think tank.
"But relations have hit a low before, and so far oil dependence on both sides has been a check. Chavez tends to go up to a line and then pull back, and the oil question prevents things going completely off track," he said.
Chavez, a blunt-speaking, self-styled revolutionary who has become a regional standard-bearer for anti-American sentiment, upped the ante over the weekend when he warned he could halt oil shipments to the United States and close Venezuelan-owned refineries there.
Nervous about the stability of Middle East oil, the United States needs every barrel of the crude it gets from Venezuela, supplier of some 15 percent of U.S. imports. Other suppliers like Canada and Mexico are already pumping at full capacity.
Likewise, left-wing Chavez is reliant on the roughly $80 million a day he gets from U.S. oil sales to fund sweeping social programs introduced since he took office in 1998.
The United States swallows more than half of Venezuela's oil, and analysts doubt that far-off importers like China could emerge as buyers of Venezuela's heavy crude any time soon. Chavez's past threats to cut off U.S. oil never materialized.
"Markets will keep an eye on the situation but I haven't heard anything to suggest people are giving it more credence than usual," said Jed Baker, head of Latin American research at think tank Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
"It's not something they could do for a sustained period. Venezuela needs the U.S. as much as the U.S. needs Venezuela."
ELECTION IN VIEW Continued ...
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) - A barrage of insults and two foreign staff expulsions have knocked U.S.-Venezuelan relations to a new low, but the pair's mutually vital oil trade should act as a collision buffer, analysts say.
Already icy relations worsened last week after the U.S.-bashing Hugo Chavez expelled a U.S. naval attache on spying allegations and the State Department responded by ordering out a Venezuelan diplomat. Exiled diplomat Jeny Figueredo arrived back in Caracas to cheering crowds on Monday.
"Relations are probably at their lowest point. Things have gotten very bad. The two governments are on a collision course," said Michael Shifter, a Latin American analyst at the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based think tank.
"But relations have hit a low before, and so far oil dependence on both sides has been a check. Chavez tends to go up to a line and then pull back, and the oil question prevents things going completely off track," he said.
Chavez, a blunt-speaking, self-styled revolutionary who has become a regional standard-bearer for anti-American sentiment, upped the ante over the weekend when he warned he could halt oil shipments to the United States and close Venezuelan-owned refineries there.
Nervous about the stability of Middle East oil, the United States needs every barrel of the crude it gets from Venezuela, supplier of some 15 percent of U.S. imports. Other suppliers like Canada and Mexico are already pumping at full capacity.
Likewise, left-wing Chavez is reliant on the roughly $80 million a day he gets from U.S. oil sales to fund sweeping social programs introduced since he took office in 1998.
The United States swallows more than half of Venezuela's oil, and analysts doubt that far-off importers like China could emerge as buyers of Venezuela's heavy crude any time soon. Chavez's past threats to cut off U.S. oil never materialized.
"Markets will keep an eye on the situation but I haven't heard anything to suggest people are giving it more credence than usual," said Jed Baker, head of Latin American research at think tank Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
"It's not something they could do for a sustained period. Venezuela needs the U.S. as much as the U.S. needs Venezuela."
ELECTION IN VIEW Continued ...
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Euro gas pipe 'hits UK consumer'
Euro gas pipe 'hits UK consumer'
Supply problems are threatening price hikes across Europe
UK consumers have paid an extra £300m for gas this winter because of problems with the European gas supply system, British Gas owner Centrica has said.
Centrica said a lack of competition had made it difficult to get enough gas to meet demand at peak times.
It added that the way gas contracts are currently structured - being linked to the price of oil - could cost European consumers as much as £40bn this year.
The report comes as politicians prepare to discuss the UK gas market on Monday.
The Parliamentary Trade & Industry Select Committee is scheduled to meet on Monday to discuss the changing UK energy environment.
Gas prices have become a worry for consumers and policymakers alike as the UK produces less from its fields and relies more on imports from Europe.
Europe's failure to open up its energy markets is costing UK customers dear
Mark Clare, managing director of British Gas
With supplies being squeezed, the cost of wholesale gas has increased by 70% over the past 12 months and has trebled since 2003.
Greater freedom
Suppliers have warned that prices are likely to rise, and there have been suggestions in the media that the increase may be as much as 25%.
This would make the average household bill about £1,000 a year.
Duncan Sedgewick of the Energy Retail Association told the BBC: "To see the sort of dramatic rises we've had in wholesale prices over the last 12 months is quite incredible."
Centrica denied it had made a decision on how much it would increase prices, and other suppliers also said they had no intention of raising prices in the near future.
"Clearly, all suppliers are buying their gas in the same market, therefore we would expect that suppliers will be increasing their tariffs substantially as we go through 2006," said a spokesman for Centrica.
"But we haven't said anything about timing or scale of an increase."
However, in December, Centrica warned it was selling gas to its customers at a loss.
This is because wholesale price rises are not immediately passed on to domestic customers, so, when the price rise comes, it can seem unnecessarily steep.
Patrick Heron, chairman of Heron Energy, which monitors gas prices told the BBC: "When they eventually do move the price up they have to move it up sufficiently to cover their accumulated losses and their loss going forward for a period."
Supply problems
To avoid a hike in prices, Europe needs to open up its gas markets to greater competition, Centrica said.
"With Britain now dependent on gas imports from the continent, Europe's failure to open up its energy markets is costing UK customers dear," said Mark Clare, managing director of British Gas.
He went on to explain that Russia's recent decision to cut off gas to Ukraine as it negotiated a new pricing contract - a move that impacted on supplies to Europe - showed the problem was not limited to the UK.
Greater freedom and access to the European gas pipelines could cut the cost of transporting gas across Europe by up to £180m a year, Centrica said.
In the meantime, industry experts predict that wholesale prices rise will last for another year at least.
"The very high wholesale prices are likely to continue for probably another 12 months, but after that they are likely to fall off a cliff," said Patrick Heron.
Euro gas pipe 'hits UK consumer'
Supply problems are threatening price hikes across Europe
UK consumers have paid an extra £300m for gas this winter because of problems with the European gas supply system, British Gas owner Centrica has said.
Centrica said a lack of competition had made it difficult to get enough gas to meet demand at peak times.
It added that the way gas contracts are currently structured - being linked to the price of oil - could cost European consumers as much as £40bn this year.
The report comes as politicians prepare to discuss the UK gas market on Monday.
The Parliamentary Trade & Industry Select Committee is scheduled to meet on Monday to discuss the changing UK energy environment.
Gas prices have become a worry for consumers and policymakers alike as the UK produces less from its fields and relies more on imports from Europe.
Europe's failure to open up its energy markets is costing UK customers dear
Mark Clare, managing director of British Gas
With supplies being squeezed, the cost of wholesale gas has increased by 70% over the past 12 months and has trebled since 2003.
Greater freedom
Suppliers have warned that prices are likely to rise, and there have been suggestions in the media that the increase may be as much as 25%.
This would make the average household bill about £1,000 a year.
Duncan Sedgewick of the Energy Retail Association told the BBC: "To see the sort of dramatic rises we've had in wholesale prices over the last 12 months is quite incredible."
Centrica denied it had made a decision on how much it would increase prices, and other suppliers also said they had no intention of raising prices in the near future.
"Clearly, all suppliers are buying their gas in the same market, therefore we would expect that suppliers will be increasing their tariffs substantially as we go through 2006," said a spokesman for Centrica.
"But we haven't said anything about timing or scale of an increase."
However, in December, Centrica warned it was selling gas to its customers at a loss.
This is because wholesale price rises are not immediately passed on to domestic customers, so, when the price rise comes, it can seem unnecessarily steep.
Patrick Heron, chairman of Heron Energy, which monitors gas prices told the BBC: "When they eventually do move the price up they have to move it up sufficiently to cover their accumulated losses and their loss going forward for a period."
Supply problems
To avoid a hike in prices, Europe needs to open up its gas markets to greater competition, Centrica said.
"With Britain now dependent on gas imports from the continent, Europe's failure to open up its energy markets is costing UK customers dear," said Mark Clare, managing director of British Gas.
He went on to explain that Russia's recent decision to cut off gas to Ukraine as it negotiated a new pricing contract - a move that impacted on supplies to Europe - showed the problem was not limited to the UK.
Greater freedom and access to the European gas pipelines could cut the cost of transporting gas across Europe by up to £180m a year, Centrica said.
In the meantime, industry experts predict that wholesale prices rise will last for another year at least.
"The very high wholesale prices are likely to continue for probably another 12 months, but after that they are likely to fall off a cliff," said Patrick Heron.
Gas rise takes home energy bills over �1,000
Calls for investigation into 25% price hike
· Fears for welfare of poor, sick and elderly customers
Richard Wray
Monday February 6, 2006
The Guardian
The energy regulator was facing demands for a full scale investigation into gas prices last night as it emerged that British consumers are to be hit with a record-breaking rise in gas bills.
British Gas is to inform its 11 million customers that their gas bills are going to rise by as much as 25% as the company, which supplies more than half of all UK households, tries to pass on some of the recent jump in the wholesale cost of gas.
The increase - the largest forced through by an energy supplier since the market was deregulated at the end of the 1990s - will see the average customer pay an estimated £209 extra a year, taking the average energy bill up to £1,030. It will be the third price rise in a year.
MPs will raise the issue today at a select committee meeting with the trade and industry secretary, Alan Johnson. He will face questions on the precarious state of the country's energy supply, which has lead to rampant price rises .
Consumer groups reacted angrily to British Gas's planned price rise, warning that it would condemn many vulnerable people to a very cold winter, while Age Concern warned that for some pensioners the move could be fatal.
Last year's winter deaths were the highest for five years, but this winter looks particularly severe, already ranking as the third coldest in the last decade.
"Many pensioners live on a low, fixed income and are hit particularly hard by hikes in their fuel bills," said Gordon Lishman, Age Concern's director general. "Despite the government's efforts to tackle fuel poverty, many older people will be anxious about their fuel costs and some will choose between heating or eating."
Ann Robinson, director of consumer policy at uSwitch.com, the online price comparison service, attacked the price rises and called for the industry regulator, Ofgem, to investigate. "We have been expecting an increase from British Gas but frankly these figures are shocking," she said. "There is insufficient justification for such excessive price rises. We will be looking to Ofgem to step in and investigate the reasons for these increases and verify that they are legitimate."
She estimates that the British Gas price rise will bring in an extra £1.23bn from customers. "This is a dramatic response to the recent volatility within the wholesale gas market, which is likely to subside in the near future. The fact is that British Gas ... is banking on customer apathy to keep its balance sheet looking healthy."
British Gas's owner, Centrica, pointed out yesterday that its consumer business has been loss making since the latter half of 2005 as bills have failed to keep pace with rising gas prices. The company said the wholesale gas price, which typically accounts for about half a customer's bill, had risen 75% over the winter, having gained 43% last year. "We are not going to comment on the timing or the size of any price increases but given the fact that wholesale gas prices are up 75% this year over last year it is more or less inevitable that all suppliers in this market will be pushing through substantial price increases," said a spokesman.
The recent rise in the wholesale gas price is due not just to increased demand during the cold weather but to a squeeze on supplies. Reserves from the North Sea are insufficient to meet UK gas needs, while supplies from mainland Europe have been patchy.
One focus of the government's recently announced energy review is the UK's reliance on gas from overseas. MPs have become increasingly concerned about the vulnerable nature of Britain's gas supplies after Russia halted the flow of gas to Ukraine last month.
These concerns will be voiced by members of the trade and industry committee today when they take evidence from Mr Johnson. They are also likely to question the minister over the likely impact of gas price rises on the government's own targets for reducing fuel poverty among the elderly, sick and disabled by 2010. From 2000 to 2003 the number of people deemed to be in fuel poverty fell from 5 million to 1.3 million, but rampant bill increases since then are understood to have taken the number over 2 million.
Adam Scorer, campaigns director at the consumer group Energywatch, said the government should also look at the state of the UK market where the 20 energy suppliers who sprang up after deregulation have been consolidated into just six major players who not only supply gas to residential customers but make huge profits from the wholesale market.
Calls for investigation into 25% price hike
· Fears for welfare of poor, sick and elderly customers
Richard Wray
Monday February 6, 2006
The Guardian
The energy regulator was facing demands for a full scale investigation into gas prices last night as it emerged that British consumers are to be hit with a record-breaking rise in gas bills.
British Gas is to inform its 11 million customers that their gas bills are going to rise by as much as 25% as the company, which supplies more than half of all UK households, tries to pass on some of the recent jump in the wholesale cost of gas.
The increase - the largest forced through by an energy supplier since the market was deregulated at the end of the 1990s - will see the average customer pay an estimated £209 extra a year, taking the average energy bill up to £1,030. It will be the third price rise in a year.
MPs will raise the issue today at a select committee meeting with the trade and industry secretary, Alan Johnson. He will face questions on the precarious state of the country's energy supply, which has lead to rampant price rises .
Consumer groups reacted angrily to British Gas's planned price rise, warning that it would condemn many vulnerable people to a very cold winter, while Age Concern warned that for some pensioners the move could be fatal.
Last year's winter deaths were the highest for five years, but this winter looks particularly severe, already ranking as the third coldest in the last decade.
"Many pensioners live on a low, fixed income and are hit particularly hard by hikes in their fuel bills," said Gordon Lishman, Age Concern's director general. "Despite the government's efforts to tackle fuel poverty, many older people will be anxious about their fuel costs and some will choose between heating or eating."
Ann Robinson, director of consumer policy at uSwitch.com, the online price comparison service, attacked the price rises and called for the industry regulator, Ofgem, to investigate. "We have been expecting an increase from British Gas but frankly these figures are shocking," she said. "There is insufficient justification for such excessive price rises. We will be looking to Ofgem to step in and investigate the reasons for these increases and verify that they are legitimate."
She estimates that the British Gas price rise will bring in an extra £1.23bn from customers. "This is a dramatic response to the recent volatility within the wholesale gas market, which is likely to subside in the near future. The fact is that British Gas ... is banking on customer apathy to keep its balance sheet looking healthy."
British Gas's owner, Centrica, pointed out yesterday that its consumer business has been loss making since the latter half of 2005 as bills have failed to keep pace with rising gas prices. The company said the wholesale gas price, which typically accounts for about half a customer's bill, had risen 75% over the winter, having gained 43% last year. "We are not going to comment on the timing or the size of any price increases but given the fact that wholesale gas prices are up 75% this year over last year it is more or less inevitable that all suppliers in this market will be pushing through substantial price increases," said a spokesman.
The recent rise in the wholesale gas price is due not just to increased demand during the cold weather but to a squeeze on supplies. Reserves from the North Sea are insufficient to meet UK gas needs, while supplies from mainland Europe have been patchy.
One focus of the government's recently announced energy review is the UK's reliance on gas from overseas. MPs have become increasingly concerned about the vulnerable nature of Britain's gas supplies after Russia halted the flow of gas to Ukraine last month.
These concerns will be voiced by members of the trade and industry committee today when they take evidence from Mr Johnson. They are also likely to question the minister over the likely impact of gas price rises on the government's own targets for reducing fuel poverty among the elderly, sick and disabled by 2010. From 2000 to 2003 the number of people deemed to be in fuel poverty fell from 5 million to 1.3 million, but rampant bill increases since then are understood to have taken the number over 2 million.
Adam Scorer, campaigns director at the consumer group Energywatch, said the government should also look at the state of the UK market where the 20 energy suppliers who sprang up after deregulation have been consolidated into just six major players who not only supply gas to residential customers but make huge profits from the wholesale market.
Chavez warns U.S. over refineries if cuts ties - Yahoo! News
CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez warned on Saturday he could shut his government's U.S.-based refineries and sell oil to nations other than the United States if Washington decided to cut diplomatic ties, as relations between the two countries continue to worsen.
Chavez said he did not want to take such measures after he expelled a U.S. military attache earlier this week on spying charges and Washington responded by ordering out a Venezuelan diplomat in a tit-for-tat retaliation.
"If the U.S. government wants to break relations, then they have to take that decision over there, over there. I could easily order the refineries we have over there closed," Chavez told a large crowd of supporters.
"We'll see how high oil prices go, we'll see how much a gallon of gas will cost. I could easily sell the oil we sell to the United States to other countries," he said. "We don't want to get to that extreme, we want them to leave us in peace.
Venezuela, the world's No. 5 oil exporter, supplies about 15 percent of U.S. petroleum imports. Venezuelan state oil firm PDVSA also operates refineries and gas stations in the United States through its Citgo refining and retailing arm.
Washington has made no suggestion that it plans to cut off relations with Venezuela.
Since his 1998 election, Chavez has clashed repeatedly with the United States, which he accuses of trying to overthrow his government and backing a brief 2002 coup attempt that he survived with the help of loyal troops.
CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez warned on Saturday he could shut his government's U.S.-based refineries and sell oil to nations other than the United States if Washington decided to cut diplomatic ties, as relations between the two countries continue to worsen.
Chavez said he did not want to take such measures after he expelled a U.S. military attache earlier this week on spying charges and Washington responded by ordering out a Venezuelan diplomat in a tit-for-tat retaliation.
"If the U.S. government wants to break relations, then they have to take that decision over there, over there. I could easily order the refineries we have over there closed," Chavez told a large crowd of supporters.
"We'll see how high oil prices go, we'll see how much a gallon of gas will cost. I could easily sell the oil we sell to the United States to other countries," he said. "We don't want to get to that extreme, we want them to leave us in peace.
Venezuela, the world's No. 5 oil exporter, supplies about 15 percent of U.S. petroleum imports. Venezuelan state oil firm PDVSA also operates refineries and gas stations in the United States through its Citgo refining and retailing arm.
Washington has made no suggestion that it plans to cut off relations with Venezuela.
Since his 1998 election, Chavez has clashed repeatedly with the United States, which he accuses of trying to overthrow his government and backing a brief 2002 coup attempt that he survived with the help of loyal troops.
Oil-Hunting China Aims to Curb Appetite - Yahoo! News
BEIJING - Just days before a Chinese firm announced a $2.3 billion investment in a Nigerian oil field last month, President
Hu Jintao' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Hu Jintao warned that China has to rein in surging energy use that has made it one of the world's biggest oil importers.
The announcements underlined the dual tracks of Beijing's energy policy. While striving to secure foreign oil and gas to fuel sizzling economic growth of more than 9 percent a year, it is struggling to limit soaring reliance on outside supplies by increasing nuclear and hydroelectric power.
China is not alone in this predicament — witness
President Bush' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> President Bush's plea to cut American dependence on Mideast oil. But the voracious appetite for energy in China and other fast-developing nations, notably neighbor India, is one factor propelling oil prices upward.
And some of China's energy deals are causing bumps on the world's political landscape. Its investments in
Iran' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Iran and Sudan have prompted complaints it is abetting pariah nations, and Chinese pursuit of deals in Canada and other U.S. allies is causing unease in Washington.
Last year, China's state-controlled CNOOC Ltd. gave up an $18.5 billion takeover bid for Los Angeles-based oil company Unocal Corp. after critics complained the deal might jeopardize U.S. security.
The energy buying spree has taken Chinese firms as far afield as Venezuela and Australia. In the past six months, these companies have signed deals totaling $7 billion for stakes in oil fields in Kazakhstan, Nigeria and
Syria' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Syria. A state-controlled company is reportedly considering a $2 billion bid for yet another Kazakh property.
"There is a strategic element to it," said Kevin Norrish, an energy analyst for Barclays Capital in London. "It's something that we've seen before. Japan was doing the same thing about 10 to 15 years ago, with a lot of its natural resource companies, including oil companies, buying into foreign projects."
China's oil firms began investing abroad in the late 1990s, after double-digit economic growth outstripped supplies from domestic fields that had met its needs for decades. Rising family incomes have led to an explosion in private car sales, while industry demands for plastics and other petrochemical products have soared.
The jump in imports has Chinese leaders fretting about depending on Middle Eastern oil that arrives by sea routes they don't control.
The biggest state-owned oil company, China National Petroleum Corp., agreed in August to pay $4.2 billion for an oil producer in neighboring Kazakhstan that can deliver oil to China by pipeline.
Yet China has to go where the oil is. CNOOC said in January that it was paying $2.3 billion for a share in a Nigerian offshore oil field. In December, CNPC said it would pay $576 million with an Indian partner for access to a Syrian oil field.
In a sign that Beijing plans still more acquisitions, it signed an agreement with India last month to share information on what they pay for foreign assets in an effort to avoid costly bidding wars.
Such purchases have prompted suggestions Beijing is using its state companies to lock up foreign supplies. But industry analysts say the oil market is too complex for that.
"This is definitely not about buying up oil resources in order to ship the oil into China," Norrish said.
"Basically, China's interest is in ensuring growth in energy supplies," he said. By buying stakes in foreign projects, "it can assist in ensuring that investments take place and projects go ahead."
Deals currently being signed by oil-producing countries only give foreign investors a share in output for a limited time, rather than control of the oil field, said Leo Drollas, chief economist for the Center for Global Energy Studies in London.
"If they think that by investing in Sudan and Venezuela and elsewhere they've secured oil somehow, I'm not so sure of that, from a strategic standpoint," he said.
Drollas said it might be safer to sign long-term contracts to buy oil on the open market. "Given the volatility of some regions, who is to guarantee that your assets might not be worthless one day?" he said.
China suffered just such a setback when a $1.2 billion deal signed by a state firm to develop an oil field in
Saddam Hussein' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Saddam Hussein's
Iraq' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Iraq became worthless after the U.S.-led invasion toppled the dictator three years ago.
Beijing has tried to curb oil imports by raising output from its own wells. It has reported modest success, saying imports in 2005 fell by 5 percent to 953.2 million barrels, while output from domestic wells rose 3.7 percent to 1.27 billion barrels.
China's booming oil needs have pushed up average long-term prices on world markets, according to financial analysts. But they say other factors are to blame for the recent price spike, noting that China's consumption stayed nearly flat last year.
"You can't blame China for $70-a-barrel oil," Norrish said.
The government is pushing conservation measures and more use of nuclear power, wind turbines, hydroelectric dams and other alternative sources. Plans call for building 30 nuclear plants by 2020.
But its goals are modest, calling for nuclear power to supply 4 percent of the country's needs by 2010, with an additional 5 percent from wind and solar generators.
And with economic growth forecast above 9 percent in coming years, China's total oil and gas imports are expected to rise sharply.
"The share of fossil fuels (in China's energy use) may fall but the absolute amounts consumed will grow," Norrish said.
BEIJING - Just days before a Chinese firm announced a $2.3 billion investment in a Nigerian oil field last month, President
Hu Jintao' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Hu Jintao warned that China has to rein in surging energy use that has made it one of the world's biggest oil importers.
The announcements underlined the dual tracks of Beijing's energy policy. While striving to secure foreign oil and gas to fuel sizzling economic growth of more than 9 percent a year, it is struggling to limit soaring reliance on outside supplies by increasing nuclear and hydroelectric power.
China is not alone in this predicament — witness
President Bush' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> President Bush's plea to cut American dependence on Mideast oil. But the voracious appetite for energy in China and other fast-developing nations, notably neighbor India, is one factor propelling oil prices upward.
And some of China's energy deals are causing bumps on the world's political landscape. Its investments in
Iran' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Iran and Sudan have prompted complaints it is abetting pariah nations, and Chinese pursuit of deals in Canada and other U.S. allies is causing unease in Washington.
Last year, China's state-controlled CNOOC Ltd. gave up an $18.5 billion takeover bid for Los Angeles-based oil company Unocal Corp. after critics complained the deal might jeopardize U.S. security.
The energy buying spree has taken Chinese firms as far afield as Venezuela and Australia. In the past six months, these companies have signed deals totaling $7 billion for stakes in oil fields in Kazakhstan, Nigeria and
Syria' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Syria. A state-controlled company is reportedly considering a $2 billion bid for yet another Kazakh property.
"There is a strategic element to it," said Kevin Norrish, an energy analyst for Barclays Capital in London. "It's something that we've seen before. Japan was doing the same thing about 10 to 15 years ago, with a lot of its natural resource companies, including oil companies, buying into foreign projects."
China's oil firms began investing abroad in the late 1990s, after double-digit economic growth outstripped supplies from domestic fields that had met its needs for decades. Rising family incomes have led to an explosion in private car sales, while industry demands for plastics and other petrochemical products have soared.
The jump in imports has Chinese leaders fretting about depending on Middle Eastern oil that arrives by sea routes they don't control.
The biggest state-owned oil company, China National Petroleum Corp., agreed in August to pay $4.2 billion for an oil producer in neighboring Kazakhstan that can deliver oil to China by pipeline.
Yet China has to go where the oil is. CNOOC said in January that it was paying $2.3 billion for a share in a Nigerian offshore oil field. In December, CNPC said it would pay $576 million with an Indian partner for access to a Syrian oil field.
In a sign that Beijing plans still more acquisitions, it signed an agreement with India last month to share information on what they pay for foreign assets in an effort to avoid costly bidding wars.
Such purchases have prompted suggestions Beijing is using its state companies to lock up foreign supplies. But industry analysts say the oil market is too complex for that.
"This is definitely not about buying up oil resources in order to ship the oil into China," Norrish said.
"Basically, China's interest is in ensuring growth in energy supplies," he said. By buying stakes in foreign projects, "it can assist in ensuring that investments take place and projects go ahead."
Deals currently being signed by oil-producing countries only give foreign investors a share in output for a limited time, rather than control of the oil field, said Leo Drollas, chief economist for the Center for Global Energy Studies in London.
"If they think that by investing in Sudan and Venezuela and elsewhere they've secured oil somehow, I'm not so sure of that, from a strategic standpoint," he said.
Drollas said it might be safer to sign long-term contracts to buy oil on the open market. "Given the volatility of some regions, who is to guarantee that your assets might not be worthless one day?" he said.
China suffered just such a setback when a $1.2 billion deal signed by a state firm to develop an oil field in
Saddam Hussein' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Saddam Hussein's
Iraq' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Iraq became worthless after the U.S.-led invasion toppled the dictator three years ago.
Beijing has tried to curb oil imports by raising output from its own wells. It has reported modest success, saying imports in 2005 fell by 5 percent to 953.2 million barrels, while output from domestic wells rose 3.7 percent to 1.27 billion barrels.
China's booming oil needs have pushed up average long-term prices on world markets, according to financial analysts. But they say other factors are to blame for the recent price spike, noting that China's consumption stayed nearly flat last year.
"You can't blame China for $70-a-barrel oil," Norrish said.
The government is pushing conservation measures and more use of nuclear power, wind turbines, hydroelectric dams and other alternative sources. Plans call for building 30 nuclear plants by 2020.
But its goals are modest, calling for nuclear power to supply 4 percent of the country's needs by 2010, with an additional 5 percent from wind and solar generators.
And with economic growth forecast above 9 percent in coming years, China's total oil and gas imports are expected to rise sharply.
"The share of fossil fuels (in China's energy use) may fall but the absolute amounts consumed will grow," Norrish said.
Saturday, February 04, 2006
Madrid backs Gas Natural takeover
The Spanish government has given approval to Gas Natural's 22.4bn euro ($27bn; £15bn) hostile takeover of fellow Spanish energy company Endesa.
Gas Natural's approach for electricity firm Endesa had already been approved by Spain's energy industry watchdog.
Combined, they create the world's third biggest energy firm.
Endesa has strongly opposed the deal, but Spain's government has a policy of promoting industry consolidation to create "national champions".
Not only does it not damage competition, it fosters it
Deputy Prime Minister Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega
Madrid hopes that such larger firms will be better able to compete on the global stage.
Outside of Spain both companies have large operations in Latin America.
'National interest'
"The success of the transaction will produce increased competition and, as a result, an increase in the quality of the service and a reduction in prices," said Spain's Deputy Prime Minister Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega.
"The deal is in Spain's interest because the company that will be formed by the merger will be one of Europe's biggest companies.
"Not only does it not damage competition, it fosters it."
However, the approval is subject to conditions, and the combined group will have to shed 4,300 megawatts of electricity generating capacity.
Gas Natural will also have to sell all but 1% of its 15% stake in gas distributor Enagas.
Endesa shareholders will now discuss the Gas Natural offer at their annual general meeting on 24 February.
They will vote on the deal at an extraordinary general meeting at a later date.
The Spanish government has given approval to Gas Natural's 22.4bn euro ($27bn; £15bn) hostile takeover of fellow Spanish energy company Endesa.
Gas Natural's approach for electricity firm Endesa had already been approved by Spain's energy industry watchdog.
Combined, they create the world's third biggest energy firm.
Endesa has strongly opposed the deal, but Spain's government has a policy of promoting industry consolidation to create "national champions".
Not only does it not damage competition, it fosters it
Deputy Prime Minister Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega
Madrid hopes that such larger firms will be better able to compete on the global stage.
Outside of Spain both companies have large operations in Latin America.
'National interest'
"The success of the transaction will produce increased competition and, as a result, an increase in the quality of the service and a reduction in prices," said Spain's Deputy Prime Minister Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega.
"The deal is in Spain's interest because the company that will be formed by the merger will be one of Europe's biggest companies.
"Not only does it not damage competition, it fosters it."
However, the approval is subject to conditions, and the combined group will have to shed 4,300 megawatts of electricity generating capacity.
Gas Natural will also have to sell all but 1% of its 15% stake in gas distributor Enagas.
Endesa shareholders will now discuss the Gas Natural offer at their annual general meeting on 24 February.
They will vote on the deal at an extraordinary general meeting at a later date.
Friday, February 03, 2006
Guardian Unlimited Business | Business latest | Russia's Gazprom considers bid for British Gas owner Centrica
Move by state-owned outfit alarms government
· Takeover would give it 12m British gas customers
Terry Macalister, Nick Paton Walsh and Mark Milner
Friday February 3, 2006
The Guardian
Russian plans to seize control of a major part of Britain's gas supply industry hardened last night when Gazprom revealed that a bid for British Gas's parent group Centrica was "possible".
Alexander Shkuta, deputy chairman of Gazprom's export business, Gazexport, said a takeover of Centrica, which has 12 million gas customers, was being "analysed and investigated".
The statement triggered alarm in government circles, but in the City it sent shares in Centrica racing 25% at one stage before they closed 11% higher at 300p, adding nearly £1bn to its market capitalisation - it is now valued at nearly £11bn.
The Russian state-owned Gazprom has recently tarnished its image by cutting off gas supplies to the Ukraine over a pay row; it was seen by some as a move by the Kremlin to punish a former ally that had drifted towards Washington.
The Department of Trade and Industry said last night that any new ownership at Centrica would face robust scrutiny and that "security of energy supply to the UK's consumers is paramount".
The prospects of a merger were first raised in the Guardian last month when the deputy chairman of Gazprom, Alexander Medvedev, told this paper that he was looking closely at various UK firms with an eye to acquisition.
Yesterday Mr Shkuta went further when he was quoted by Reuters as saying: "As far as acquisitions go, the acquisition of the company Centrica in Britain is possible. This question is currently being analysed and investigated. A decision has not been taken."
A spokeswoman for Gazprom initially said the comments, carried by both the local Interfax and Reuters, were made during a conference call with investors. She later claimed Mr Shkuta had been misquoted but declined to say what he had really said.
Last night Centrica denied it had held any merger talks with Gazprom, which is the largest gas company in the world and sits on massive reserves in Siberia.
"We have had no approach, this is just speculation and we don't comment on speculation," said a Centrica spokesman.
Through British Gas, Centrica is the biggest supplier of energy to UK homes with 12 million gas customers and six million electricity customers. This puts it ahead of other utilities, many of which are already owned by foreign firms such as Germany's E.ON and RWE, and France's EDF Energy.
Centrica employs almost 30,000 people in Britain and operates seven gas-fired power stations generating 6% of the UK's electricity. It is currently considering the construction of an eighth, in Devon. It also owns the offshore Rough field, which accounts for 80% of Britain's gas storage capacity, and is developing a number of wind farms. Outside Britain, Centrica has interests in North America, where it has five million customers, and Belgium and has exploration interests in Nigeria.
The DTI said it was aware of all the bid speculation. "Any new ownership would face robust scrutiny by the regulatory regime before entering that market. The energy market regulator Ofgem and the competition authorities would have to be satisfied that consumers' interests were assured," said a spokesman.
Gazprom previously told the Guardian it wanted to deliver up to 20% of Britain's wholesale gas supplies by 2015 and mentioned ailing Scottish Power, a rival of Centrica, as a potential acquisition target.
Mr Medvedev accused western critics of trying to use Cold War rhetoric and insisted it was a normal commercial argument. A source close to Gazprom told Interfax the acquisition had been studied for two years.
Move by state-owned outfit alarms government
· Takeover would give it 12m British gas customers
Terry Macalister, Nick Paton Walsh and Mark Milner
Friday February 3, 2006
The Guardian
Russian plans to seize control of a major part of Britain's gas supply industry hardened last night when Gazprom revealed that a bid for British Gas's parent group Centrica was "possible".
Alexander Shkuta, deputy chairman of Gazprom's export business, Gazexport, said a takeover of Centrica, which has 12 million gas customers, was being "analysed and investigated".
The statement triggered alarm in government circles, but in the City it sent shares in Centrica racing 25% at one stage before they closed 11% higher at 300p, adding nearly £1bn to its market capitalisation - it is now valued at nearly £11bn.
The Russian state-owned Gazprom has recently tarnished its image by cutting off gas supplies to the Ukraine over a pay row; it was seen by some as a move by the Kremlin to punish a former ally that had drifted towards Washington.
The Department of Trade and Industry said last night that any new ownership at Centrica would face robust scrutiny and that "security of energy supply to the UK's consumers is paramount".
The prospects of a merger were first raised in the Guardian last month when the deputy chairman of Gazprom, Alexander Medvedev, told this paper that he was looking closely at various UK firms with an eye to acquisition.
Yesterday Mr Shkuta went further when he was quoted by Reuters as saying: "As far as acquisitions go, the acquisition of the company Centrica in Britain is possible. This question is currently being analysed and investigated. A decision has not been taken."
A spokeswoman for Gazprom initially said the comments, carried by both the local Interfax and Reuters, were made during a conference call with investors. She later claimed Mr Shkuta had been misquoted but declined to say what he had really said.
Last night Centrica denied it had held any merger talks with Gazprom, which is the largest gas company in the world and sits on massive reserves in Siberia.
"We have had no approach, this is just speculation and we don't comment on speculation," said a Centrica spokesman.
Through British Gas, Centrica is the biggest supplier of energy to UK homes with 12 million gas customers and six million electricity customers. This puts it ahead of other utilities, many of which are already owned by foreign firms such as Germany's E.ON and RWE, and France's EDF Energy.
Centrica employs almost 30,000 people in Britain and operates seven gas-fired power stations generating 6% of the UK's electricity. It is currently considering the construction of an eighth, in Devon. It also owns the offshore Rough field, which accounts for 80% of Britain's gas storage capacity, and is developing a number of wind farms. Outside Britain, Centrica has interests in North America, where it has five million customers, and Belgium and has exploration interests in Nigeria.
The DTI said it was aware of all the bid speculation. "Any new ownership would face robust scrutiny by the regulatory regime before entering that market. The energy market regulator Ofgem and the competition authorities would have to be satisfied that consumers' interests were assured," said a spokesman.
Gazprom previously told the Guardian it wanted to deliver up to 20% of Britain's wholesale gas supplies by 2015 and mentioned ailing Scottish Power, a rival of Centrica, as a potential acquisition target.
Mr Medvedev accused western critics of trying to use Cold War rhetoric and insisted it was a normal commercial argument. A source close to Gazprom told Interfax the acquisition had been studied for two years.
Nuclear energy's uranium deficit
From Washington to Tehran, nuclear energy has become a white hot topic of debate. The nuclear energy industry looks set for significant expansion with the price of oil surging and concerns about the environment increasing. However, there is a problem in that demand for uranium is outstripping supply.
Uranium prices have risen sharply in the past three years, transforming the dynamics of the market, attracting new risk capital and speculators and promising significantly higher earnings growth for existing players.
From Washington to Tehran, nuclear energy has become a white hot topic of debate. The nuclear energy industry looks set for significant expansion with the price of oil surging and concerns about the environment increasing. However, there is a problem in that demand for uranium is outstripping supply.
Uranium prices have risen sharply in the past three years, transforming the dynamics of the market, attracting new risk capital and speculators and promising significantly higher earnings growth for existing players.
Wind power capacity surged by 18 percent in EU in 2005
A total of 40,504 megawatts of wind generators were installed at the end of December, a rise of 6,183 MW, or 18 percent, over a year earlier, the Brussels-based European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) said.
Wind GeneratorsPortable Generator Guide Products, Brands, Price and more.
Complete Home Power eBookFree biodiesel book stirling solar make electricity, methane, and more
Renewable Energy StoreWe stock a range of wind turbines solar panels, batteries and more
All the Wind TurbinesAll the Wind Turbines Savings Find Local Wind Turbines Here!
(Ads by Google)
Over the last decade, wind power capacity in the EU has increased by an average 32 percent year, it said in a press release. Germany, Spain and Denmark have the most capacity, with 18,428 MW, 10,027 MW and 3,122 MW respectively. The 40,504 MW installed last year will produce some 83 Terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity in an average year for European weather, EWEA said. For 2004, that accounts for 2.8 percent of EU electricity consumption. The EU has placed a big political priority on the quest for clean, domestically-produced energy sources to help wean it from dependence on oil and gas, which with coal are the biggest sources of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. The search has been sharpened in past weeks by concern over Russia as a reliable supplier of gas. Six percent of the EU-15's energy needs are met today by wind and other renewables, half of which comes from wind, although the proportion varies greatly among member states. The European Commission has set a goal of 12 percent from renewables by 2010, and the European Parliament last September demanded a mandatory benchmark of 20 percent by 2020. © 2006 AFP
A total of 40,504 megawatts of wind generators were installed at the end of December, a rise of 6,183 MW, or 18 percent, over a year earlier, the Brussels-based European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) said.
Wind GeneratorsPortable Generator Guide Products, Brands, Price and more.
Complete Home Power eBookFree biodiesel book stirling solar make electricity, methane, and more
Renewable Energy StoreWe stock a range of wind turbines solar panels, batteries and more
All the Wind TurbinesAll the Wind Turbines Savings Find Local Wind Turbines Here!
(Ads by Google)
Over the last decade, wind power capacity in the EU has increased by an average 32 percent year, it said in a press release. Germany, Spain and Denmark have the most capacity, with 18,428 MW, 10,027 MW and 3,122 MW respectively. The 40,504 MW installed last year will produce some 83 Terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity in an average year for European weather, EWEA said. For 2004, that accounts for 2.8 percent of EU electricity consumption. The EU has placed a big political priority on the quest for clean, domestically-produced energy sources to help wean it from dependence on oil and gas, which with coal are the biggest sources of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. The search has been sharpened in past weeks by concern over Russia as a reliable supplier of gas. Six percent of the EU-15's energy needs are met today by wind and other renewables, half of which comes from wind, although the proportion varies greatly among member states. The European Commission has set a goal of 12 percent from renewables by 2010, and the European Parliament last September demanded a mandatory benchmark of 20 percent by 2020. © 2006 AFP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
