Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
<<They could include a few buckets of the "water" with each shipment in case the k-fuel ignites.>>
My aren't we clever!
I said "stopped", not "dead". If you don't understand the difference I'll try to explain it.
If you don't "stop" the next time you see a traffic light turn red, when that 18 wheeler runs your ass over, you're going to be "dead".
Does that clear things up?
Edwards opposes coal-fired power plant
PAWLEYS ISLAND, S.C. (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Monday said a proposed coal-fired power plant shouldn't be built in northeastern South Carolina, continuing his call for a ban on those facilities.
"My view is that needs to stop," Edwards said of the $1 billion, 600-megawatt plant set to be built along the Pee Dee River in this early voting state. Santee Cooper officials are awaiting a final permit from state environmental regulators.
The utility's officials say they need the plant to meet energy demands, and can't wait for newer or cleaner energy to be developed, but have said the plant will be environmentally responsible. They hope to have it running about 2012.
Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, told about 150 people at a campus of Coastal Carolina University that coal-fired plants are "taking a bad situation and making it worse."
He also said he was opposed to new nuclear power plants and that the U.S. has no credibility in global warming discussions. "We are the worst polluter on the planet," Edwards said.
I predict the voters will tell John Edwards to walk home and turn out the lights.
Some day the stuff will hit the fan again, we're heading toward a situation where power blackouts will be commonplace. Unless the political arm-wrestling over the carbon dioxide boogeyman comes to an end and utilities are able to plan long-term they will continue to postpone capacity additions until they are forced to build by a public that can't turn the lights on. EEE's deal with TXU was stopped because of the global warming hysteria drummed up by AlGore and his ilk.
The geologic record tells us that global warming is a natural phenomenon, there have been four ice ages during the past one million years, between each is a warm period. AlGore won't debate, he wants to dictate, his lies and distortions are well known, yet the Green Movement clings to his forecast of fear for mankind and they continue to oppose new power construction based on falsehoods. AlGore's biggest lie of all is that a consensus of scientists agree that we can control or reverse global warming. We can't, nor should we. Thanks to global warming we don't live in an ice age.
Stocks That Can Power Up
By NAUREEN S. MALIK
THIS WINTER SEASON, INVESTORS have given the heave-ho to electricity merchants that cater to businesses and residents in unregulated environments.
Seen as pure commodity plays in a weakening economy, mid-cap companies NRG Energy and Dynegy have become some of the worst industry performers. Since touching highs in October, NRG shares have fallen 16% to $39.54 and Dynegy has slipped 34% to $7.25.
But U.S. demand for electricity continues to rise steadily while the ability to produce more power is restricted. That should turn those low-voltage shares into power plays over the next few years.
Dynegy and NRG have a strong presence in the tightest markets in Texas, California and the Northeast. They look even more compelling based on their diversified electricity-plant portfolios, growth rates, strong management teams and the reasonable value of their shares.
Higher prices of natural gas that is used to produce electricity should bolster power rates and expand profits. Both companies should also continue to use strong free cash flow to buy back shares.
Eric Green, a senior managing partner at PENN Capital Management, says this is a buying opportunity because "we are going to have demand in electricity that increases every year, recession or not."
Stocks of power merchants could rally 25% to 50% over the next 18 months with Dynegy and then NRG leading the pack, says Green.
Other stocks that should perform well are Mirant, which has fallen sharply after failing to find a suitor, and Reliant Energy though it has a pricey valuation.
But looking at their balance sheets and capital structures, Green likes NRG and Dynegy for more than their common stocks: The companies have quality bonds that offer high yields.
Last month, Fitch Ratings raised its outlook on all four merchant generators to Positive from Stable. Other agencies have not followed. They appear hesitant after the meltdown of Enron and a flurry of projects to build new power plants led to bankruptcies in the industry, including NRG. Dynegy barely avoided this fate.
NRG Chief Executive Officer David Crane says this has been a sore point, but that the credit markets appear to be shrugging aside NRG's B rating. "We have the same rating [since] the day we came out of bankruptcy; it just makes no sense," Crane says.
Gordon Howald, an analyst with Calyon Securities, says that the power market is "entering the sweet spot and there isn't a lot of elasticity of demand."
Evidence of strong power prices from auctions of electricity-generation capacity by plant owners over the next few months could spark interest in these stocks.
Recovering natural-gas and coal prices should continue to drive up "spark spreads" -- the operating margin calculated by subtracting the cost of fuel from the selling price of power.
A modest 1% increase in electricity demand would require another 300-400 billion cubic feet of natural gas a year, potentially driving up the commodity's price even more, says Lasan Johong, a senior analyst at RBC Capital Markets.
The volatility in electricity prices could get sharper as reserve margins catering to peak demand for electricity shrink. Measured as a percent, the reserve margin compares the amount of extra power that can be generated from idle capacity versus the amount of power needed during normal conditions. Howald expects reserve margins to narrow from 18%-19% in the Northeast and 20% in Texas, to 15% and 12.5% by 2011, respectively.
While NRG has some exposure to these plants, 42% of Dynegy's business is from peak power plants. Peak power prices averaged $74.05 per megawatt hour last week, according to Howald. The 10-week average is $66.02 versus $56.81 a year earlier.
Environmental concerns are making it harder for companies to get permits to build new plants. Jefferies & Co. electric utility analyst Paul Fremont expects high power prices to persist in this bullish cycle for the next two to four years.
Meanwhile, political wrangling over whether to peg a cost to carbon emissions is creating an overhang on the industry. A slew of wide-ranging bills make it difficult to value electricity merchants' assets, says Howald. This plus the tough credit environment has dried up merger-and-acquisition activity in this fragmented industry.
Jefferies' Fremont does not expect a carbon cost or tax to be resolved till 2009, although a favored bill could add clarity.
NRG is expected to be hit harder by the carbon legislation because it operates more in mixed markets where electricity is generated by a combination of coal and natural-gas producers.
Natural gas produces less carbon. This could squeeze margins at coal-fired plants operating in markets where natural-gas plants set electricity prices.
NRG CEO Crane says fears over "how draconian the carbon regime that ultimately passes is exaggerated." He is expecting a moderate cost that will be offset by NRG's greener programs in nuclear, wind and cleaner coal electricity production.
Calyon's Howald says the long-term value in NRG and Dynegy is apparent, but that we "don't have a sense of urgency" that could drive the stock higher in the near term.
Mild weather, a collapse in commodity prices and reports of new plants projects could also pressure shares.
Dynegy generates 19,642 of power in the Midwest (48%), Northeast (19%) and West (33%). About 50% of its near-term production is hedged while its long-term capacity is unhedged. NRG hedges nearly all of its production, effectively serving as a surge protector for earnings against volatility in commodity prices. It has 47 plants that generate nearly 24,000 megawatts of power.
In the near term, NRG expects to drive growth by increasing earnings profitability by cutting costs, synergies and other internal controls, says Crane. This year is also a pivotal year -- some projects have progressed enough that the company can sell stakes in them at lucrative rates.
Even in a tough economic environment, the companies' solid business models in a tightening electricity market could provide a spark for these beaten-down shares.
Power industry construction has been paralyzed by a public hysteria, commonly known as Global Warming.
The Greenies have effectively put a stop to virtually any electric utility expansion. Coal, in many ways our best choice is out because of the Carbon Dioxide boogeyman, Natural Gas is just too expensive to fuel, nobody will touch Nuclear, Renewables are fun to talk about but hardly significant.
Looks like it's going to take a major blackout to shake this monkey off our backs, all this at the same time the headline was that electricity use went up approx 10% for the first week of Jan over the same week a year ago.
You would think with all the Global Warming grief out there that those carbon capture startup companies would be making their investors very rich.
http://www.platts.com/Coal/News/8457323.xml?p=Coal/News&sub=Coal
Costs, GHG fears kill or delay 31 coal plants in 2007: group
Portland, Maine (Platts)--9Jan2008
Thirty-one coal-fired plants totaling about 24,250 MW were canceled or
delayed in 2007 because of rising construction costs and concerns over
greenhouse gas emissions, according to Resource Media, a public relations firm
representing Western environmental groups.
"Strong public opposition, combined with uncertainty over the future
costs of complying with carbon dioxide emission caps and concerns about global
warming's environmental and economic impacts, forced many utilities to
cancel--or regulators to reject--plants from Florida to Washington," the group
said late Monday.
New regulations in Oregon, Washington and California limiting
greenhouse gas emissions also scuttled proposed plants, Resource Media added.
Anticipated costs for the canceled and delayed plants totaled about $45.3
billion, the group said. The estimate includes Houston-based TXU's agreement
to cancel eight projects totaling about 6,860 MW. It also includes six
integrated gasification combined cycle plants totaling 3,360 MW.
Four projects were canceled in Florida: Tampa Electric's 630-MW IGCC
plant, Florida Power & Light's 1,960-MW Glades plant, the Florida Municipal
Power Agency's 800-MW Taylor Energy Center and Seminole Electric Power
Cooperative's 750-MW Seminole 3 Generating Station.
Increasing capital costs were a key factor in same of the cancellations
and delays, the group said. Resource Media cited a June report by Standard &
Poor's that found capital costs for new generation climbed by more than 50% in
the past three years.
Price escalation may continue with continuing worldwide demand for
building power plants possibly driving capital costs well above $2,500/kW for
supercritical coal plants and approaching $1,000/kW for combined-cycle gas
turbines, according to the S&P report.
Call it what you want, Ft. Union is an operating plant that validates the technology and provides test-burn samples of the K-Fuel product for potential buyers to evaluate in their own steam boilers.
Obviously there was much about the original design that was flawed, hence the almost two year sorting-out period and redesign by Bechtel. What was intended to be a working model on a small scale has turned out to be something more like a large-scale research project. Collins says that phase is complete, that Evergreen and Bechtel are satisfied that they have a working design for future plants.
I see no relevance in the comment about reaching 75% capacity. Ft. Union has two main processor vessels, regardless of whether the two processors share some systems of coal handling, waste handling, source heat, whatever, the plant only needs one main vessel to operate in order to demonstrate the entire process. If one processor works reliably, another twin operating alongside adds nothing. At this point Evergreen needs to conserve their cash and revamping the A processor to match the changes to the B is only useful if they decide to produce K-Fuel for sale into the general market.
The main goal for Evergreen is to sell plants, not sell product. The small Ft. Union plant with one processor running is capable of producing all of the test burn coal necessary for that purpose. The cost of operating Ft. Union is probably quite high on a per ton basis with the natural gas fired heat source currently used. If they make the decision to expand Ft. Union the coal fired boiler will need to be used as the heat source.
US utility output rises 9.8% from 2007 in January 5 week: EEI
Washington (Platts)--9Jan2008
US utilities generated 79,986 GWh in the week ending January 5, 9.8%
above the 72,829 GWh generated in the corresponding week of 2007, the Edison
Electric Institute said Wednesday.
The weekly total was 5,154 GWh above the 74,832 GWh total posted in the
week that ended December 29, EEI said.
Output rose in eight of the nine regions EEI assesses, with the largest
percentage increase coming in the Southeast, where generation totaled 22,133
GWh, or 17.5% above the year-ago total. That was followed by the Mid-Atlantic
region, where generation for the week totaled 8,909 GWh, 12.7% above the
corresponding prior-year week.
Generation fell only in the Pacific Southwest, where output was 4,719
GWh, 12.4% below the same week in 2007.
The numbers are based on generation from investor-owned utilities,
cooperatives and government-owned utilities.
Makes You Wonder What Shorts Are Thinking About $23.75 & No Volume?
Clean Coal Technologies, Inc. Acquires Powerful Technology for Transforming Coal into Nonpolluting Energy
CCTI's Clean Coal Technologies Advances as "China's Pollution Solution"
CORAL SPRINGS, Fla. — Doug Hague, Vice President & Chief Operating Officer, announced today that Clean Coal Technologies, Inc. (Pink Sheets:CCTC) has completed the transaction that gives it 100% ownership of the proprietary new technology that transforms dirty coal into a clean-burning energy source.
This suite of intellectual property includes the patent for the revolutionary technology that reduces the harmful airborne pollutants associated with coal-fired utilities, industrial applications, and domestic consumers of coal. Through its acquisition of Clean Coal Systems, Inc., which previously held the patent, CCTI is positioned to enter the rapidly evolving clean coal market as a global provider of clean coal technologies that will address many of the pollution concerns associated with the burning of coal.
Company executives stated, "This acquisition, combined with our $100 million joint venture in China, establishes our company as 'China's Pollution Solution'. We are committed to taking a leadership role by leveraging our proprietary technology to provide a clean, inexpensive and pollution-free energy source that will enhance economic development while protecting the health and well being of people in China, India, and the rest of the world. In China alone, two billion tons of coal could be transformed into pure, nonpolluting power."
With the support of US Department of Commerce, CCTI plans to build modular front-ends to power plants that will transform coal with high levels of impurities and contaminants into an efficient, clean-burning energy resource. With its significant social and economic benefits, the joint venture has received tremendous support and encouragement from the Chinese government, which has designated an 80-acre parcel of land for the construction and operation of the first of what could potentially be hundreds of CCTI plants in China.
"Safe Harbor for Forward Looking Statements: This press release contains forward-looking statements about the Company's business prospects that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. You can identify these statements by the fact that they use words such as "anticipate," "estimate," "expect," "project," "intend," "should," "plan," "goal," "believe," and other words and terms of similar meaning in connection with any discussion of future operating or financial performance. The Company assumes no obligation to update the forward-looking statements contained in this press release as a result of new information or future events or developments."
Clean Coal Technologies, Inc., Coral Springs Doug Hague,
Short Interest Data For December 07, End MonthThat looks like a good link you posted. The data matches what Coal King quoted. Maybe it just took a while for the shortsqueeze website to update. The WSJ confirms the 9% increase in open short positions:
http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3026-shortint_NYSE_E-NYSE.html
It sure is interesting that the shorts have decided to get more aggressive. Since the latest data was for December, I'm sure they were hoping to benefit from tax loss selling. However, the problem of trying to cover just became more difficult. You can't begin to cover anywhere near 20 million shares without starting a serious squeeze. Keep in mind that 20 million shares is about a month's worth of normal trading activity.
The bankruptcy argument doesn't make any sense, because they have $75M in the bank, a $30M boiler for sale, the Buckeye mine, and the C-Lock business. Clearly this company isn't going away anytime soon. On the contrary, this company's prospects look very good, as they seem to be very close to signing their first definitive agreement with a major utility to build a new K-fuel plant.
Nobody knows when Evergreen will announce that first big plant deal, but I sure wouldn't want to have an open short position when they do. Furthermore, Evergreen is now searching for several project management positions to fulfill those new contracts:
http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?re=106&co=xkfxx&ah=http%3A%2F%2Fcompany%2Emonster%2Ecom%2Fkfx&aj=Evergreen+Energy+Inc%2E
I also noticed in Collins' latest blog that he was recently in Japan:
http://blog.evgenergy.com/blog/_archives/2008/1/4/3447070.html
I can only imagine ONE reason for the president of this company to be in Japan, and that is to talk to Sumitomo about financing new plants. (Japanese utilities want K-fuel, but much of their coal supply is imported from Indonesia, the most logical site for new K-fuel plants.) Also keep in mind that Collins stated in previous conference call that Sumitomo was interested in new plant financing opportunities. Sumitomo has made no secret that they are VERY interested in K-fuel opportunities:
http://www.sumitomocorp.co.jp/english/news_e/20070426_112048_shigen_e.shtml
Yes, the water extracted is nasty stuff, but that is all more reason to handle the toxins pre-combustion, before they corrode or contaminate the power-plant components and before they combine at higher temperatures with other compounds that then have to be removed from the flue gas or from the ash. The water that can be reclaimed is a useful by-product.
DOE Estimates Future Water Needs for Thermoelectric Power Plants
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/news/techlines/2007/07083-Water_Use_Analysis_Updated.html
The water needs of coal-fired plants can be augmented by the water removed (30%) by using K-Direct processing to upgrade low-rank coal at the plant immediately prior to combustion. This reduction in draw-down of water for power production benefits farms and municipalities that would otherwise compete with utilities for this resource. Especially important in the West, places like Texas that have abundant lignite reserves and often scarce supplies of water.
Reading the article, I see that Duke may favor IGCC, but it remains a very uncertain technology in many ways. It is undeniable that we will have many years to find ways to replace pulverized coal generation and that we should make this energy source as clean and efficient as possible for as long as it is utilized. K-Fuel meets this goal.
WOW!
WOW! Cliffhucker, do you really find that message (1129) so impressive that it merits a "WOW"?
Wow, I thought you had more going on than that.
Re-read message 1126, this is today's reality, a functioning prototype plant, engineered with Sasol coal gasification technology at it's core, re-engineered and optimized for coal upgrading by Bechtel. It's been a long road but the proof is on the ground in Gillette. Bechtel will stand behind it's re-design for future plants based on what has been learned from this first pilot plant.
Shorty will rail on about the irrelevant history from the 70's and 80's because that's really all he has to talk about. What does merging with a shell company have to do with anything? Irrelevant.
Are you implying that this board is "biased"? It seems open enough to me.
To the contrary, a board that advertises itself as "EE Skeptic" is by nature attracting posters with a negative slant.
Partners are: American Electric Power, Southern Co., ane Peabody Energy.
You forgot one partner, the largest contributor of financing...
THE US GOVERNMENT.
Currently operational coal gasification plants have been funded with DOE money. Commercialization of this technology is not possible in the present economic environment without huge subsidies.
fwiw,
Megaton is a measurement most commonly used for explosives, ie. nuclear warheads, basically a one-time event.
In the coal business, the correct terminology is million tons per year (mty) a rate of annual capacity.
Enjoy your messages Coin, just had to comment on the humorous aspect of your use of explosives terminology to describe something (the plant) that you wouldn't want to see explode.
Frenchee, what's the deal with these charts?
I have to page down 15 times to get past all of the spaghetti to get to the messages.
I can't imagine what use there is for this, can you explain it?
I'm sure (sarcasm) the Sierra Club has thousand of scientists working on solutions to our energy needs.
Actually they have a few intellectual types who have probably never produced anything, yet they can find fault in everything. Every form of energy has it's drawbacks, including solar, wind and hydropower. The Sierra Club should turn it's efforts toward perfecting perpetual motion.
Utopian Liberalism is a disease cured only by extreme adversity.