Those who acted on the note "UK Coal on the move" last week will not be disappointed with either by the 7p rise since or the news of a move into profitability or the arrival of John Whittaker's Peel Land and Property Investments Limited who have taken a 5.07% stake of 7,560,150 shares, to join Channel Hotels and Properties Ltd who have extended their holdings to 3.11 % by 200,000 shares in the company.
Preliminary results
UK Coal anticipates reporting a first half year profit before
taxation of £7m (H1 2005: £31m loss), including a revaluation gain on investment
properties of £5m (H1 2005: £5m). Sales for the six-month period were £193m (H1
2005: £164m).
The group will announce its first-half results on Sept 6.
"UK COAL welcomes the DTI's Energy Review report, which underscores the important long-term contribution of coal-fired generation and aims to optimise the use of economical domestic coal reserves. In particular, we are pleased with the
Government's decision to convene a Coal Forum, which will bring together electricity generators and coal producers to help find solutions to secure the long-term future of domestic coal production."
The Coal Forum was welcomed by the TUC, having abandoned the Miners years ago. They reasonably and necessarily call for ..
"
The TUC and mining unions have argued that clean coal should make a long-term contribution to the UK's energy needs - and greenhouse gas targets.
They will now be pressing the Government to support the recommendations of the Clean Coal Task Group, the joint industry/union/Government body that has already published a framework for clean coal in the UK, allied to developing the UK's indigenous coal reserves.
http://www.a2mediagroup.com/?c=134&a=8168
The Clean Coal Task Group has already produced a programme for clean coal including:
*
High level Energy Review endorsement for Clean Coal in Britain and indigenous coal production as part of a diverse generation portfolio.
*
Actions by generators and coal suppliers towards securing long-term supplies of indigenous coal at prices competitive with imported coal. (i.e Government subsidies in some form or other)
*
A change in the planning regime to remove the 'presumption against'.
*
Urgent adjustment to the European Emissions Trading Scheme, to remove perverse disincentives for Clean Coal-fired power stations."
A letter from
Mitsui Babcock, Renfrew in the Financial Times today (Not online) boosts the claim of the open cast mining industry - evidently the "to remove perverse disincentives for Clean Coal-fired power stations. " are going to be much argued over as the absurd EU ETS scheme founders and eventually collapses as the UK becomes increasingly desperate to generate electricity.
Cash in now after global capitalism helped destroy the UK indigenous energy resource - get into UK Coal and AB Ports who are building the huge new docks at HUll to handle coal and petcoke (for Drax - which owners have seen their shares rise from £5 in December 2005 to £8.80(ish) today).
If you want to read what Mitsui Babcock have to say about the Energy Review and where they see their
commercial opportunities see here ( Alert 21 page PDF).
This is essential reading for anyone interested in the problems facing the UK due to years of neglect , havering and time wasting - resulting in a looming energy deficit - long forecast by teh Forthcoming UK Energy Deficit (FCUKED).
These are the pithy, short sharp and barbed criticism Mitsui Babcock raise ;
Since the Government’s 2003 Energy White Paper
1. Emissions of carbon dioxide have risen in the UK
2. Investment in renewables has stalled despite financial encouragement through the Renewables Obligation
3. The UK has experienced record prices for gas and seen a halt to
investment in gas from generating companies (not quite with Centricas plant at Devon due in 3 years)
4.The Emissions Trading Scheme has failed to significantly affect the mix of energy
generation or trigger investment in carbon emissions reduction. (And is sue to collapse)
5.Security of supply, environmental and cost issues are now impacting on the confidence of the UK plc - concerns over the current situation were raised by the Confederation of British Industry in December 2005.
6. Britain escaped the effects of the gas row between Ukraine and Russia in January 2006, but the dispute demonstrated the real possibility that overseas gas supplies could be cut.
According to the International Energy Agency, proven coal reserves worldwide are equivalent to lmost 200 years of production at current rates and exceed those of oil (36-44 years) and gas (66 Years) by a wide margin. Coal can be stockpiled safely in the open air and its supply increased quickly whenever it is needed. (they don't mention the fact that UK PLc has to pay for it, and boast have to move it round - we haven't shipped coal by air since the Berlin airlift in the 5o's)
Here is their prescription for action ...
• Clean Coal Technology is the only short term solution to environmental, economic and security of supply challenges with a vital role as a long term solution within a diverse energy portfolio.
• Government must invest in Clean Coal to stabilise energy prices. Clean Coal solves the short term environmental and supply challenges while delivering cheaper electricity than gas or renewables.
• Government must proactively ensure security of supply through a diverse energy portfolio. The Emissions Trading Scheme has failed to affect the energy mix or reduce carbon emissions.
• Government must invest in Clean Coal if the UK is to close the UK's energy gap; gas prices are rising, nuclear is for the long term and renewables are clean but only supply energy intermittently.
• Government must lead industry investment in today’s Clean Coal Technology, ensuring National Allocation Plan CO2 Allowances trigger investment in this technology during the 2008 - 2012 period, mirroring Germany’s recent success in this area and subsequent rush for
Clean Coal.
• Government must fund demonstrations of CO2 capture and storage during the period 2008 to 2015, proving this second stage Clean Coal Technology, removing almost all emissions. It should also ensure all future coal plants are ‘capture ready’ and compatible with the emerging technology.
• Government must also invest in nuclear power to replace existing plants. Nuclear energy is climate friendly, a complement to Clean Coal and essential to securing a diverse energy portfolio.
• Government policy should be determined by the suitability of technologies for global application, tapping into the export potential (?) for UK plc and maximising the environmental impact worldwide.
• Government policy should prescribe the levels for each energy source (max and min) within the diverse portfolio, recognising the relative prices for each and the timescales to build up capacity.
What goes around comes around.
In 1945, Nye Bevan said "The UK is island is mainly made of coal, and surrounded by a sea full of fish. Only an organising genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time". Organising genius? Step forward the EU. As a result of gaping holes in European state aid rules, that allow Germany to pay massive subsidies to its miners, Britain's remaining mines are uncompetitive, and we are now a major coal importer - up 29% last year. Least said about the impact of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and that twat Bradshaw at DEFR the better - as they have allowed Spanish fishermen to hoover up all the fish in the North Sea, creating an ecological disaster area in what were once the world's richest fisheries (following the dumb Newfies earlier) -- and a prime British national asset.
POSTSCRIPTA valued correspondent bring to my attention a Prime Ministers Question yesterday ....subsequent to the G8 jamboree.
Mr. Ian Taylor (Esher and Walton) (Con): May I switch the subject to what was a backdrop to the G8 summit—the position of President Putin and his attitude to the use of energy almost as a weapon of diplomacy? Did the Prime Minister have time to talk to President Putin about what is going on in Russia, and about what Russia’s ambitions are in the “near area”, as he calls it? That is particularly relevant, given that the need for this country to invest in nuclear power is partly due to our need for a sense of assurance about our sources of energy, because of the threat that Russia may one day use our need for energy against us.
The Prime Minister: We did discuss that, and the Russians gave a clear assurance that they would abide by the charter on energy that we drew up and promulgated at the summit. I expressed my view, as I always do, that the only way to make progress in Russia or elsewhere is by adherence to democratic principles. To be fair, the Russian President made it very clear that he understands people’s anxieties about security of supply, which was the reason why he felt it right to adopt and agree to the charter that we all signed. The hon. Gentleman is right that one of the reasons why it is so important to have a balanced energy policy is to ensure that we are not too reliant on any one source.
Just another picture to remind us all of the mind set of these Neanderthals who believe that stealing land, bombing homes, bulldozing houses, killing women and children and ignoring UN resolutions is a sound Foreign Policy.
