Subscribe: SourceWatch - Recent changes [en]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&feed=rss
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
Tags:
coal  energy  line line  line  plant  power plant  power  project  ref  revision november  revision revision  revision  unit 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: SourceWatch - Recent changes [en]

SourceWatch - Recent changes [en]



Track the most recent changes to the wiki in this feed.



Last Build Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:49:19 GMT

 



HEMA Amasra power station

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:27:46 GMT

‎External resources: added banktrack ←Older revision Revision as of 08:27, 21 November 2017 Line 50: Line 50:     ===External resources=== ===External resources===  +  +* [https://www.banktrack.org/project/amasra_hema_coal_plant Amasra coal mine and power station, Turkey] Banktrack, 2017.     [[Category: Proposed coal plants in Turkey]] [[Category: Proposed coal plants in Turkey]]  [[Category: Proposed coal plants in Asia]] [[Category: Proposed coal plants in Asia]] [...]



Shareholder action on coal

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:16:49 GMT

‎Coal-related SEC reporting requirements: removed redlink ←Older revision Revision as of 08:16, 21 November 2017 (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 40: Line 40:     ===Shareholders vote for transparency on MDU coal ash=== ===Shareholders vote for transparency on MDU coal ash=== −In 2009, As You Sow and Green Century Capital Management filed five proposals asking [[CMS Energy]], [[First Energy]], [[MDU Resources Group]], [[Southern Company]], and [[Xcel Energy]] to report on efforts to reduce environmental and health hazards associated with toxic [[coal waste]] ([[coal ash]]) and to protect utilities from financial and regulatory risk.Michael Passoff, [http://www.asyousow.org/publications/2010%20articles/Proxy%20Preview%202010.pdf "Helping Foundations Align Investment and Mission"] As You Sow Proxy Preview Report, 2010. Coal ash is a byproduct of burning coal that contains arsenic, mercury, lead, and other toxins. The ash is stored in enormous [[coal waste]] ponds, landfills, or mines and, according to the EPA, has contaminated groundwater in 24 states. Coal waste is also vulnerable to spills: in 2008, [[TVA Kingston Fossil Plant coal ash spill|a dam burst at a coal ash pond]] operated by the [[Tennessee Valley Authority]], covering local communities in toxic sludge.  TVA has estimated spill-related costs at $1.2 billion. As of April 2010, [[coal waste]] is not subject to federal regulations.+In 2009, As You Sow and Green Century Capital Management filed five proposals asking [[CMS Energy]], [[First Energy]], [[MDU Resources Group]], [[Southern Company]], and [[Xcel Energy]] to report on efforts to reduce environmental and health hazards associated with toxic [[coal waste]] ([[coal ash]]) and to protect utilities from financial and regulatory risk.Michael Passoff, [http://www.asyousow.org/publications/2010%20articles/Proxy%20Preview%202010.pdf "Helping Foundations Align Investment and Mission"] As You Sow Proxy Preview Report, 2010. Coal ash is a byproduct of burning coal that contains arsenic, mercury, lead, and other toxins. The ash is stored in enormous [[coal waste]] ponds, landfills, or mines and, according to the EPA, has contaminated groundwater in 24 states. Coal waste is also vulnerable to spills: in 2008, [[TVA Kingston Fossil Plant coal ash spill|a dam burst at a coal ash pond]] operated by the [[Tennessee Valley Authority]], covering local communities in toxic sludge.  TVA has estimated spill-related costs at $1.2 billion. As of April 2010, [[coal waste]] is not subject to federal regulations.    −April 2010 was the first-ever shareholder vote on coal ash practices and disclosure, with 25.6% of [[MDU Resources Group]] shareholders voting in support of increased transparency on [[coal ash]] risk. The resolution, supported by over 42 million votes, asked the company to report on the its efforts to reduce environmental and health hazards associated with [[coal waste]] ponds, impoundments, and mines, and how those efforts reduce risks to the company’s finance and operations. The resolution was filed by Green Century Capital Management (Green Century) and As You Sow.[http://www.asyousow.org/sustainability/climate%20Coal.shtml "Climate-Coal Ash"] As You Sow Website, accessed April 2010.  +April 2010 was the first-ever shareholder vote on coal ash practices and disclosure, with 25.6% of [[MDU Resources Group]] shareholders voting in support of increased transparency on [[coal ash]] risk. The resolution, supported by over 42 million votes, asked the company to report on the its efforts to reduce environmental and health hazards associated with [[coal waste]] ponds, impoundments, and mines, and how those efforts reduce risks to the company’s finance and operations. The resolution was fil[...]



Citizen groups working on coal issues

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 07:55:42 GMT

Turkey: added Greanpeace Akdeniz

←Older revision Revision as of 07:55, 21 November 2017
Line 166: Line 166:
 
===Turkey===
 
===Turkey===
 
''See also [[Turkey and coal]]''
 
''See also [[Turkey and coal]]''
 +
* [http://www.greenpeace.org/turkey/tr/ Greanpeace Akdeniz (Greanpeace Mediterranean)]
 
* [http://www.tema.org.tr TEMA The Turkish Foundation for Combating Soil Erosion, for Reforestation and the Protection of Natural Habitats]
 
* [http://www.tema.org.tr TEMA The Turkish Foundation for Combating Soil Erosion, for Reforestation and the Protection of Natural Habitats]
  



Alaska LNG Pipeline (AKLNG)

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 05:09:40 GMT

‎History ←Older revision Revision as of 05:09, 21 November 2017 (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 11: Line 11:  *'''Status: '''Proposed *'''Status: '''Proposed  *'''Start Year: '''2025 *'''Start Year: '''2025  +  +==History==  +The pipeline project began as a joint-venture between North Slope producers Exxon Mobil Corp., BP Alaska,ConocoPhillips Co, and state-owned  Alaska Gasline Development Corp. (AGDC).  However, by late 2016, AGDC was the only company remaining in the development of the pipeline project.  The pipeline project was projected to cost $45-$65 billion and was seen as a crucial method to increase the state's revenue after years of slowing crude oil production.  The project had been originally conceived in 2014 when crude oil was $115 a barrel, with demand soaring in Asia concurrently.Tim Daiss, [https://www.forbes.com/sites/timdaiss/2016/09/16/65b-alaska-energy-project-crashes-and-burns/#16a1de864c7b $65 Billion Alaska LNG Project Crashes and Burns,] ''Forbes'', September 16, 2016  The three oil companies dismissed the project's viability due to the continuing trend of low energy prices and the enormous capital necessary to realize the project, causing the producers to leave the project.[http://www.alaskajournal.com/2016-10-06/north-slope-producers-talks-state#.WhOajVWnHrc North Slope producers in talks with state,] ''Alaska Journal of Commerce'', October 6, 2016     ==Background== ==Background== [...]



Isabel Copper power station

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 01:54:11 GMT

4 years = cancelled ←Older revision Revision as of 01:54, 21 November 2017 Line 10: Line 10:  According to a 2013 article, talks were being held between Philippine Associated Smelting and Refining Corp. (PASAR) and three power producers considering a commitment to receive the excess energy from the plant beyond the 70 MW needed by the smelter. The companies in talks with PASAR are GN Power Ltd. of the Netherlands, GDF-Suez of Switzerland and Electricity Generating Public Co. Ltd. (Egco) of Thailand. Once an agreement was made, a feasibility study would be conducted, requiring about six months. According to a source for PASA, a grid impact study had already been completed with National Grid Corp. of the Philippines. Groundbreaking was projected for the fourth quarter of the year.Linda Lectura, [http://bit.ly/1oK9M4G "Pasar plans to put up 200-MW power plant in Leyte refinery,"] ABS-CBN News, February 7, 2013 (Google cache) According to a 2013 article, talks were being held between Philippine Associated Smelting and Refining Corp. (PASAR) and three power producers considering a commitment to receive the excess energy from the plant beyond the 70 MW needed by the smelter. The companies in talks with PASAR are GN Power Ltd. of the Netherlands, GDF-Suez of Switzerland and Electricity Generating Public Co. Ltd. (Egco) of Thailand. Once an agreement was made, a feasibility study would be conducted, requiring about six months. According to a source for PASA, a grid impact study had already been completed with National Grid Corp. of the Philippines. Groundbreaking was projected for the fourth quarter of the year.Linda Lectura, [http://bit.ly/1oK9M4G "Pasar plans to put up 200-MW power plant in Leyte refinery,"] ABS-CBN News, February 7, 2013 (Google cache)    −More recent reports about the project are not available, and information on it is not available on a Department of Energy list of active projects. As of December 2016, there has been no progress on the project in over three years, and it appears to be abandoned or shelved.+More recent reports about the project are not available, and information on it is not available on a Department of Energy list of active projects. As of November 2017, there has been no progress on the project in over four years, and it appears to be abandoned.     ==Project Details== ==Project Details== Line 16: Line 16:  *'''Location:''' PASAR plant, Isabel Municipality, Leyte Province, Philippines *'''Location:''' PASAR plant, Isabel Municipality, Leyte Province, Philippines  *'''Coordinates:''' 10.8945865, 124.4360876 (exact) *'''Coordinates:''' 10.8945865, 124.4360876 (exact) −*'''Status:''' Shelved+*'''Status:''' Cancelled  *'''Gross Capacity:''' 200 MW *'''Gross Capacity:''' 200 MW  *'''Type:'''   *'''Type:'''   [...]



Cadiz City power station

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 01:45:01 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 01:45, 21 November 2017 Line 15: Line 15:  In February 2016 Cadiz mayor Patrick Escalante expressed reservations about the project, saying the city had enough power, and that Negros Occidental was now primarily focused on renewable energy generation.[http://www.sunstar.com.ph/bacolod/business/2016/02/26/coal-terminal-boosts-income-cadiz-city-459381 "Coal terminal boosts income of Cadiz City,"] Sun Star, February 26, 2016 In February 2016 Cadiz mayor Patrick Escalante expressed reservations about the project, saying the city had enough power, and that Negros Occidental was now primarily focused on renewable energy generation.[http://www.sunstar.com.ph/bacolod/business/2016/02/26/coal-terminal-boosts-income-cadiz-city-459381 "Coal terminal boosts income of Cadiz City,"] Sun Star, February 26, 2016    −As of November 2017 there has been no news about this project since mid-2015.+As of November 2017 there has been no news about this project since mid-2015. With progress in two years, the project appears to be shelved.     ==Ownership== ==Ownership== Line 28: Line 28:  *'''Location:''' Banquerohan Barangay, Cadiz City, Negros Occidental Province, Philippines *'''Location:''' Banquerohan Barangay, Cadiz City, Negros Occidental Province, Philippines  *'''Coordinates:'''  10.95246, 123.33157 (exact) *'''Coordinates:'''  10.95246, 123.33157 (exact) −*'''Status:''' Permitted (Phase I), Announced (Phase II)+*'''Status:''' Shelved (Phase I), Shelved (Phase II)  *'''Gross Capacity:''' 300 MW (Phase I Unit 1: 150 MW; Phase II Unit 2: 150 MW) *'''Gross Capacity:''' 300 MW (Phase I Unit 1: 150 MW; Phase II Unit 2: 150 MW)  *'''Type:''' [[Subcritical]] *'''Type:''' [[Subcritical]] [...]



Xingyi Zhengluwan power station

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 00:59:19 GMT

‎Background ←Older revision Revision as of 00:59, 21 November 2017 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 1: Line 1: −{{#badges:CoalSwarm|Navbar-Chinacoal}}'''Xingyi Zhengluwan power station''' (贵州兴义郑鲁万工业园区自备电厂(兴义元豪发电厂)) is a proposed 700-megawatt (MW) coal-fired power plant in Guizhou Province, China.+{{#badges:CoalSwarm|Navbar-Chinacoal}}'''Xingyi Zhengluwan power station''' (兴义郑鲁万工业园区自备电厂,兴义元豪发电厂) is a proposed 700-megawatt (MW) coal-fired power plant in Guizhou Province, China.     ==Location==   ==Location==   −The map below shows Xingyi County, the approximate location for the plant.  +The map below shows the location for the plant at Wantun Town, Xingyi City, Qianxinan AP.   −{{#display_point:25.087, 104.906|width=600|height=500|type=normal|zoom=7}}+{{#display_point:25.198228, 105.032044|width=600|height=500|type=satellite|zoom=16}}     ==Background== ==Background== −Yuanhao Investment has proposed a two-unit coal-fired power plant with a total planned capacity of 700 MW in Guizhou Province.[http://www.chinatpg.com/InfoDetails_88875.html "贵州兴义市2 ×350 兆瓦自备电厂项目在郑鲁万工业园区开工建设,"], 火力发电网, 11/9/2012  +Yuanhao Investment has proposed a two-unit coal-fired power plant with a total planned capacity of 700 MW in Guizhou Province.[http://www.chinatpg.com/InfoDetails_88875.html "贵州兴义市2 ×350 兆瓦自备电厂项目在郑鲁万工业园区开工建设,"], 火力发电网, 11/9/2012 It allied with North United (Shenzhen) Aluminum Co as a co-investor in 2012. [http://www.sznorth.com/news_detail/newsId=8.html"我公司与元豪投资有限公司正式签署煤电铝一体化投资协议"]North United (Shenzhen) Aluminum Co, 2012-8-23    −The plant was shelved in 2012 due to lack of investment. The local government is pushing to revive the project,[http://www.gzdpc.gov.cn/art/2015/5/21/art_407_110639.html "2015年1-4月黔西南州固定资产投资及重大工程和重点项目完成情况,"] Guizhou Development and Reform Commission, 2015-05-21 but as of 2017 has not been successful. +The plant was shelved in 2012 due to lack of investment. Apparently North United (Shenzhen) Aluminum Co withdrew the investment. The local government is pushing to revive the project.[http://www.gzdpc.gov.cn/art/2015/5/21/art_407_110639.html "2015年1-4月黔西南州固定资产投资及重大工程和重点项目完成情况,"] Guizhou Development and Reform Commission, 2015-05-21  +   +Guangxi Baise Power Group became co-investor on this project in 2015.[http://www.bsdl.com.cn/_news/2015_05_22_11/2015522115955441.html"公司将与贵州元豪发电有限公司展开合作"]广西百色电力公司, 2015-05-22The construction revived in August 2017. [http://www.ranyan.org/216.html"河北电建一公司兴义项目浇筑第一罐混凝土"] 中电新闻网, 17-08-29     ==Project Details==   ==Project Details==   −*'''Sponsor:''' [[Xingyi Yangguang Assets Management]]+*'''Sponsor:''' Yuanhao Investment Co, Guangxi Baise Power Group  *'''Parent company:'''   *'''Parent company:'''    *'''Location:''' Mangou Village, Wantun Town, Xingyi County, Qianxinan AP, Guizhou Province, China *'''Location:''' Mangou Village, Wantun Town, Xingyi County, Qianxinan AP, Guizhou Province, China −*'''Coordinates:''' 25.087, 104.906 (approximate)+*'''Coordinates:''' 25.198228, 105.0320[...]



Panxian-1 power station

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 00:46:09 GMT

‎Units 1-5 ←Older revision Revision as of 00:46, 21 November 2017 Line 6: Line 6:     ==Units 1-5== ==Units 1-5== −Qiangui Power Generation Company was founded in 1989. It is co-invested by Guangxi Investment Group (63.5%) and Guizhou Industrial Investment Group (36.6%). [https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E8%B4%B5%E5%B7%9E%E9%BB%94%E6%A1%82%E5%8F%91%E7%94%B5%E6%9C%89%E9%99%90%E8%B4%A3%E4%BB%BB%E5%85%AC%E5%8F%B8"贵州黔桂发电有限责任公司"]Baidu BaikeThe company proposed 5 coal fired power units with 200MW each to meet the policy of [[Electricity Transmission From West to East]]. The 5 units were brought online between 1993 and 2001. The electricity it generated supplies Guangdong Province.+Qiangui Power Generation Company was founded in 1989. It is co-invested by Guangxi Investment Group (63.5%) and Guizhou Industrial Investment Group (36.6%). [https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E8%B4%B5%E5%B7%9E%E9%BB%94%E6%A1%82%E5%8F%91%E7%94%B5%E6%9C%89%E9%99%90%E8%B4%A3%E4%BB%BB%E5%85%AC%E5%8F%B8"贵州黔桂发电有限责任公司"]Baidu BaikeThe company proposed 5 coal fired power units with 200MW each to support the [[Electricity Transmission From West to East]]. The 5 units were brought online between 1993 and 2001. The electricity it generated supplies Guangdong Province.     The first two units were retired on December 31, 2009, and units 3-5 in 2014, to make available capacity for developing two new 660MW units.[http://www.gzqyjpjc.com/qyjbxx/szg/201309/t20130903_693.html "贵州黔桂发电有限责任公司-简介,"], 贵州省国控企业减排检测信息网, accessed 9/2/2014[http://bit.ly/1JImsWZ "黔桂公司新2号机组通过168小时试运行,"] Guangxi Investment Group, 2014 The first two units were retired on December 31, 2009, and units 3-5 in 2014, to make available capacity for developing two new 660MW units.[http://www.gzqyjpjc.com/qyjbxx/szg/201309/t20130903_693.html "贵州黔桂发电有限责任公司-简介,"], 贵州省国控企业减排检测信息网, accessed 9/2/2014[http://bit.ly/1JImsWZ "黔桂公司新2号机组通过168小时试运行,"] Guangxi Investment Group, 2014 [...]



Lanao Kauswagan power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:56:01 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 21:56, 20 November 2017 Line 6: Line 6:     ==Background on Plant== ==Background on Plant== −GNPower Kauswagan, a joint venture of the [[Ayala Corporation]] and shell company Power Partners Ltd. Co., is currently planning to build a four-unit coal-fired power plant with a total planned capacity of 540 MW in Lanao del Norte Province. The project is expected to cost $1 billion.[http://ayalanews.com/ayala-corporation/news/2014/05/ac-energy%E2%80%99s-gnpk-signs-epc-contract-552mw-thermal-plant-mindanao AC Energy’s GNPK Signs EPC Contract for 552MW Thermal Plant in Mindanao], Ayala Corporation press release, 5 May 2014.+GNPower Kauswagan, a joint venture of the [[Ayala Corporation]] and shell company Power Partners Ltd. Co., is currently planning to build a four-unit coal-fired power plant with a total planned capacity of 540 MW in Lanao del Norte Province. In May 2014, Ayala put the cost of the plant at US $1 billion.[http://ayalanews.com/ayala-corporation/news/2014/05/ac-energy%E2%80%99s-gnpk-signs-epc-contract-552mw-thermal-plant-mindanao AC Energy’s GNPK Signs EPC Contract for 552MW Thermal Plant in Mindanao], Ayala Corporation press release, 5 May 2014. In July 2017, the cost of the project to date was estimated by one observer to be US $2.5 billion.[http://www.opinyon.com.ph/index.php/news/climate-change/2610-2-5-b-kauswagan-power-plant-rises 2.5-B Kauswagan power plant rises], OpinYon, 10 Jul 2017.     GNPower began site clearing work in August 2013, having signed an agreement for sale of 330 MW of power from the plant to Power Supply Aggregation Group Corp. (PSAGCorp), a group of Mindanao electric cooperatives.Flores, Alena Mae. [http://manilastandardtoday.com/2013/08/31/ayala-gn-power-clear-site-for-lanao-coal-plant/ Ayala, GN Power clear site for Lanao coal plant]. ''Manila Standard Today'', 31 Aug. 2013. Environmental permits for the project were issued in March 2014.[http://www.doe.gov.ph/doe_files/pdf/01_Energy_Situationer/2014-Private-Sector-Initiated-Power-Projects-Mindanao%20Committed-September-30.pdf Private Sector Initiated Power Projects (Mindanao)], Philippines Department of Energy, 30 Sept. 2014.   GNPower began site clearing work in August 2013, having signed an agreement for sale of 330 MW of power from the plant to Power Supply Aggregation Group Corp. (PSAGCorp), a group of Mindanao electric cooperatives.Flores, Alena Mae. [http://manilastandardtoday.com/2013/08/31/ayala-gn-power-clear-site-for-lanao-coal-plant/ Ayala, GN Power clear site for Lanao coal plant]. ''Manila Standard Today'', 31 Aug. 2013. Environmental permits for the project were issued in March 2014.[http://www.doe.gov.ph/doe_files/pdf/01_Energy_Situationer/2014-Private-Sector-Initiated-Power-Projects-Mindanao%20Committed-September-30.pdf Private Sector Initiated Power Projects (Mindanao)], Philippines Department of Energy, 30 Sept. 2014.   [...]



Martin Drake Power Plant

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 20:37:36 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 20:37, 20 November 2017 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 2: Line 2:  '''Martin Drake Power Plant''' is a coal-fired power station owned and operated by the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado. '''Martin Drake Power Plant''' is a coal-fired power station owned and operated by the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado.    −The remaining coal plants are units 5-7. Unit 5 will be decommissioned by Dec. 31, 2017. Units 6-7 will be closed by 2035 at the latest.Billie Stanton Anleu, [http://gazette.com/colorado-springs-utilities-board-seals-fate-for-drake-unit/article/1568245 "Colorado Springs Utilities board seals fate for Drake unit,"] The Gazette, January 20, 2016 Unit 5 was taken off-line by March 2017.[http://www.koaa.com/story/34643353/do-over-planned-on-measuring-air-pollution-at-drake-power-plant "Do over planned on measuring air pollution at Drake power plant,"] KOAA News, Mar 1, 2017+The plant is made up of the coal-burning units 5-7. Unit 5 was taken off-line in March 2017.[http://www.koaa.com/story/34643353/do-over-planned-on-measuring-air-pollution-at-drake-power-plant "Do over planned on measuring air pollution at Drake power plant,"] KOAA News, Mar 1, 2017 Units 6-7 will be closed by 2035,Billie Stanton Anleu, [http://gazette.com/colorado-springs-utilities-board-seals-fate-for-drake-unit/article/1568245 "Colorado Springs Utilities board seals fate for Drake unit,"] The Gazette, January 20, 2016 and possibly by 2025 due to pollution concerns.[http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/16/colorado-springs-drake-plant-closure-2025/ "Colorado Springs still rolls coal in heart of city, but may shut Drake plant by 2025 as residents fume,"] Denver Post,Nov 16, 2017       {{#display_map: {{#display_map: [...]



Alaska Gas Pipeline

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:54:01 GMT

added Wikipedia GFDL content acknowledgement ←Older revision Revision as of 19:54, 20 November 2017 Line 30: Line 30:     Ultimately, Northwest's consortium could not finance the project, and instead decided to "prebuild" the segments from Alberta to San Francisco and Chicago. Northwest justified the prebuild on the theory that using Canadian gas to depreciate the pipeline for a period of years would make the transportation of Alaskan gas more economic at a later date. The prebuild system went into service under the names Pacific Gas Transmission and Northern Border Pipeline. Subsequently, an affiliate of TransCanada Pipeline acquired Pacific Gas Transmission and 50% of Northern Border. Northwest was acquired by the Williams Companies . As a result, Northwest was no longer willing to pursue the full project to Prudhoe Bay. Ultimately, Northwest's consortium could not finance the project, and instead decided to "prebuild" the segments from Alberta to San Francisco and Chicago. Northwest justified the prebuild on the theory that using Canadian gas to depreciate the pipeline for a period of years would make the transportation of Alaskan gas more economic at a later date. The prebuild system went into service under the names Pacific Gas Transmission and Northern Border Pipeline. Subsequently, an affiliate of TransCanada Pipeline acquired Pacific Gas Transmission and 50% of Northern Border. Northwest was acquired by the Williams Companies . As a result, Northwest was no longer willing to pursue the full project to Prudhoe Bay.  +  +{{Wikipedia}}     ==Articles and resources== ==Articles and resources== [...]



Kamanga power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:42:05 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 19:42, 20 November 2017 Line 25: Line 25:  In August 2016 Alsons signed a US$280 million (P13.17 billion) deal with Japan’s JGC Corp. for the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) development of the second unit. Unit 2 was planned for operation in 2019.[http://www.ibtimes.ph/jgc-inks-deal-develop-alsons-210-mw-power-plant-sarangani-280-m-3275 "JGC Inks Deal To Develop Alsons’ 210-MW Power Plant In Sarangani For $280-M,"] International Business Times, Aug 4, 2016 In August 2016 Alsons signed a US$280 million (P13.17 billion) deal with Japan’s JGC Corp. for the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) development of the second unit. Unit 2 was planned for operation in 2019.[http://www.ibtimes.ph/jgc-inks-deal-develop-alsons-210-mw-power-plant-sarangani-280-m-3275 "JGC Inks Deal To Develop Alsons’ 210-MW Power Plant In Sarangani For $280-M,"] International Business Times, Aug 4, 2016    −Construction on Unit 2 began in February 2017. The second unit was then scheduled to be brought online Q1 2019.+Construction on Unit 2 began in February 2017. The second unit was then scheduled to be brought online Q1 2019. There has been no additional news about this plant since February 2017.     ===Rate issues and local power market=== ===Rate issues and local power market=== [...]



Jose Panganiban power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:15:08 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 19:15, 20 November 2017 Line 10: Line 10:  According to the company, "Market impact studies and simulations, and System Impact Study Report as of April 27, 2016 conducted by H&WB with NGCP have confirmed the Project’s feasibility." While the company website states that "Carbon sequestration is vital to meet Climate Change risks," the project actually does not include a carbon capture system. According to the company, "Market impact studies and simulations, and System Impact Study Report as of April 27, 2016 conducted by H&WB with NGCP have confirmed the Project’s feasibility." While the company website states that "Carbon sequestration is vital to meet Climate Change risks," the project actually does not include a carbon capture system.    −An April 2017 government document, apparently outdated, states that the environmental impact assessment "will be submitted in the 1st Quarter of 2016"; no news of this submittal is available. The same document states that construction would begin in Q4 2017, with completion of Unit 1 in 2021, and Unit 2 in 2025.[https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/electric_power/private_sector_initiated_power_projects/luzon_indicative_apr_2017.pdf Private Sector Initiated Power Projects (Luzon) - Indicative], Philippines Department of Energy, 30 Apr. 2017. There has been no news on this project since 2015.+An April 2017 government document, apparently outdated, states that the environmental impact assessment "will be submitted in the 1st Quarter of 2016"; no news of this submittal is available. The same document states that construction would begin in Q4 2017, with completion of Unit 1 in 2021, and Unit 2 in 2025.[https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/electric_power/private_sector_initiated_power_projects/luzon_indicative_apr_2017.pdf Private Sector Initiated Power Projects (Luzon) - Indicative], Philippines Department of Energy, 30 Apr. 2017.    +   +In September 2017, H&WB announced a goal of commissioning Unit 1 in 2022. The company also stated that the final environmental impact statement for the project would be completed in Q4 of 2017.[https://hwbasiapacific.net/2-x-350-mw-coal-fired-power-plant-in-jose-panganiban-camarines-norte-province/n 2 X 350 MW coal-fired power plant in Jose Panganiban], HW&B Pacific Asia, 8 Sep 2017.     ==Project Details== ==Project Details== Line 20: Line 22:  *'''Gross capacity:''' 700 MW *'''Gross capacity:''' 700 MW  *'''Type:''' [[Supercritical]] *'''Type:''' [[Supercritical]] −*'''Projected in service:''' 2021 (Unit 1); 2025 (Unit 2)+*'''Projected in service:''' 2022 (Unit 1); 2025 (Unit 2)  *'''Coal type:''' *'''Coal type:'''  *'''Coal source:''' *'''Coal source:''' [...]



Dinginin power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:59:32 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 17:59, 20 November 2017 Line 33: Line 33:  ==Public opposition== ==Public opposition==  The organizations Coal-Free Mariveles Movement and Bataeños for Environmental Justice have protested the proposed expansion at local hearings, together with what has been reported as strong opposition from local communities.[http://www.headlinegl.com/group-bucks-gn-coal-power-plant-expansion/ Group bucks GN coal power plant expansion], ''Headline Gitnang Luzon'', 27 Jan. 2014. The organizations Coal-Free Mariveles Movement and Bataeños for Environmental Justice have protested the proposed expansion at local hearings, together with what has been reported as strong opposition from local communities.[http://www.headlinegl.com/group-bucks-gn-coal-power-plant-expansion/ Group bucks GN coal power plant expansion], ''Headline Gitnang Luzon'', 27 Jan. 2014.  +  +In October 2017, protesters in Manila called on the Bank of the Philippine Islands to stop financing numerous coal-related projects, including the Dingimin coal plant.[https://businessmirror.com.ph/activists-protest-financing-of-coal-projects/ Activists protest financing of coal projects], ''Business Mirror'', 5 Oct 2017.     ==Project details== ==Project details== [...]



Atimonan power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:45:16 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 17:45, 20 November 2017 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 20: Line 20:  In June 2015, more than 1,500 protesters, led by church leaders, staged a march and a prayer vigil in opposition to the project. The protest, which was named "Lakad-Dasal-Bibliya para sa Kalikasan (roughly translated: "Bible prayer walk for nature") began with a march in which participants circled the town, then stopped in front of the municipal hall before continuing to Our Lady of the Angels Parish Church. At the church, the protesters heard speeches, performed dances and songs, and then held an overnight vigil.[http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/696521/quezon-townsfolk-cry-enough-of-coal-power-plants "Quezon townsfolk cry: Enough of coal power plants,"] Inquirer.net, 6 June 2015 In June 2015, more than 1,500 protesters, led by church leaders, staged a march and a prayer vigil in opposition to the project. The protest, which was named "Lakad-Dasal-Bibliya para sa Kalikasan (roughly translated: "Bible prayer walk for nature") began with a march in which participants circled the town, then stopped in front of the municipal hall before continuing to Our Lady of the Angels Parish Church. At the church, the protesters heard speeches, performed dances and songs, and then held an overnight vigil.[http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/696521/quezon-townsfolk-cry-enough-of-coal-power-plants "Quezon townsfolk cry: Enough of coal power plants,"] Inquirer.net, 6 June 2015    −In October 2017, activists rallied in front of the Bank of the Philippine Islands office in Ayala Triangle to protest its financing of the Atimonan coal plant. “Coal is not the answer to our country’s energy needs,” said Philippine Movement for Climate Justice Coordinator Ian Rivera. “Contrary to the coal industry’s persisting propaganda, coal is neither cheap nor clean. In fact, it has time and again been proven to be dirty, costly, and deadly.”[https://businessmirror.com.ph/activists-protest-financing-of-coal-projects/ Activists protest financing of coal projects], ''Business Mirror'', 5 Oct 2017.+In October 2017, activists rallied in front of the Bank of the Philippine Islands office in Ayala Triangle to protest its financing of the Atimonan coal plant. “Coal is not the answer to our country’s energy needs,” said Philippine Movement for Climate Justice Coordinator Ian Rivera. “Contrary to the coal industry’s persisting propaganda, coal is neither cheap nor clean. In fact, it has time and again been proven to be dirty, costly, and deadly.”[https://businessmirror.com.ph/activists-protest-financing-of-coal-projects/ Activists protest financing of coal projects], ''Business Mirror'', 5 Oct 2017. −       +[[File:Atimonan_Protest_Oct_2017.jpg|thumb|left|upright=1.5|October 2017: Activists protest in front of the Bank of the Philippine Islands]]     ==Project Details==   ==Project Details==   [...]



File:Atimonan Protest Oct 2017.jpg

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:23:16 GMT

James23 uploaded a new version of File:Atimonan Protest Oct 2017.jpg

New page




File:Atimonan Protest Oct 2017.jpg

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:15:56 GMT

James23 uploaded File:Atimonan Protest Oct 2017.jpg

New page




Atimonan power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:14:26 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 17:14, 20 November 2017 Line 19: Line 19:  [[File:Quezon protest.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.5|June 2015: Marchers protest proposed coal plant in Atimonan]] [[File:Quezon protest.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.5|June 2015: Marchers protest proposed coal plant in Atimonan]]  In June 2015, more than 1,500 protesters, led by church leaders, staged a march and a prayer vigil in opposition to the project. The protest, which was named "Lakad-Dasal-Bibliya para sa Kalikasan (roughly translated: "Bible prayer walk for nature") began with a march in which participants circled the town, then stopped in front of the municipal hall before continuing to Our Lady of the Angels Parish Church. At the church, the protesters heard speeches, performed dances and songs, and then held an overnight vigil.[http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/696521/quezon-townsfolk-cry-enough-of-coal-power-plants "Quezon townsfolk cry: Enough of coal power plants,"] Inquirer.net, 6 June 2015 In June 2015, more than 1,500 protesters, led by church leaders, staged a march and a prayer vigil in opposition to the project. The protest, which was named "Lakad-Dasal-Bibliya para sa Kalikasan (roughly translated: "Bible prayer walk for nature") began with a march in which participants circled the town, then stopped in front of the municipal hall before continuing to Our Lady of the Angels Parish Church. At the church, the protesters heard speeches, performed dances and songs, and then held an overnight vigil.[http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/696521/quezon-townsfolk-cry-enough-of-coal-power-plants "Quezon townsfolk cry: Enough of coal power plants,"] Inquirer.net, 6 June 2015  +  +In October 2017, activists rallied in front of the Bank of the Philippine Islands office in Ayala Triangle to protest its financing of the Atimonan coal plant. “Coal is not the answer to our country’s energy needs,” said Philippine Movement for Climate Justice Coordinator Ian Rivera.  “Contrary to the coal industry’s persisting propaganda, coal is neither cheap nor clean. In fact, it has time and again been proven to be dirty, costly, and deadly.”[https://businessmirror.com.ph/activists-protest-financing-of-coal-projects/ Activists protest financing of coal projects], ''Business Mirror'', 5 Oct 2017.  +  +     ==Project Details==   ==Project Details==   [...]



ALEC Corporations

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 16:54:32 GMT

Show changes



Davao Therma South power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 16:50:23 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 16:50, 20 November 2017 Line 16: Line 16:  In March 2014, the Davao City Council approved Phase II of the plant, two additional 172-MW coal-fired units, which would apparently expand total capacity to 645 MW. Phase II would go online in 2017-18.Gatdula, Donnabelle. [http://www.philstar.com/business/2014/03/25/1304651/davao-city-council-okays-aboitiz-coal-plant-project Davao City council okays Aboitiz coal plant project]. ''Philippine Star'', 25 Mar. 2014. Aboitiz announced in November 2014 that it was moving ahead with Unit 3, expecting to receive the notice to proceed by March 2015.Flores, Alena Mae. [http://manilastandardtoday.com/2014/11/28/aboitiz-expands-2-power-projects/ Aboitiz expands 2 power projects]. ''Manila Standard Today'', 28 Nov. 2014.   In March 2014, the Davao City Council approved Phase II of the plant, two additional 172-MW coal-fired units, which would apparently expand total capacity to 645 MW. Phase II would go online in 2017-18.Gatdula, Donnabelle. [http://www.philstar.com/business/2014/03/25/1304651/davao-city-council-okays-aboitiz-coal-plant-project Davao City council okays Aboitiz coal plant project]. ''Philippine Star'', 25 Mar. 2014. Aboitiz announced in November 2014 that it was moving ahead with Unit 3, expecting to receive the notice to proceed by March 2015.Flores, Alena Mae. [http://manilastandardtoday.com/2014/11/28/aboitiz-expands-2-power-projects/ Aboitiz expands 2 power projects]. ''Manila Standard Today'', 28 Nov. 2014.      −However, as of June 2017 there has been no news on the units since the announcement, and plans appear to be deferred or abandoned.+However, as of November 2017 there has been no news on the units since the announcement, and plans appear to be deferred or abandoned.     ==Lobby for new station to meet power demand== ==Lobby for new station to meet power demand== [...]



Davao San Miguel power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 16:40:53 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 16:40, 20 November 2017 (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 15: Line 15:  San Miguel broke ground on the two-unit Phase I in July 2013.[http://www.rappler.com/business/industries/173-power-and-energy/48362-san-miguel-power-luzon-mindanao San Miguel to expand power facilities in Luzon, Mindanao], Rappler, 19 Jan. 2014. This first phase was slated to cost P25.8 billion, or $630 million. As of September 2014, the project was running behind schedule, with completion scheduled for February 2016 for Unit 1, and July 2016 for Unit 2.[http://www.doe.gov.ph/doe_files/pdf/01_Energy_Situationer/2014-Private-Sector-Initiated-Power-Projects-Mindanao%20Committed-September-30.pdf Private Sector Initiated Power Projects (Mindanao): Committed], Philippines Department of Energy, 30 Sept. 2014. Construction was at 37% complete in February 2015.Capon, Cheneen. [http://www.edgedavao.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19928:coal-fired-power-plant-in-davsur-37-complete&catid=34:the-economy&Itemid=81 Coal-fired power plant in DavSur 37% complete]. Edge Davao, 13 Feb. 2015. San Miguel broke ground on the two-unit Phase I in July 2013.[http://www.rappler.com/business/industries/173-power-and-energy/48362-san-miguel-power-luzon-mindanao San Miguel to expand power facilities in Luzon, Mindanao], Rappler, 19 Jan. 2014. This first phase was slated to cost P25.8 billion, or $630 million. As of September 2014, the project was running behind schedule, with completion scheduled for February 2016 for Unit 1, and July 2016 for Unit 2.[http://www.doe.gov.ph/doe_files/pdf/01_Energy_Situationer/2014-Private-Sector-Initiated-Power-Projects-Mindanao%20Committed-September-30.pdf Private Sector Initiated Power Projects (Mindanao): Committed], Philippines Department of Energy, 30 Sept. 2014. Construction was at 37% complete in February 2015.Capon, Cheneen. [http://www.edgedavao.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19928:coal-fired-power-plant-in-davsur-37-complete&catid=34:the-economy&Itemid=81 Coal-fired power plant in DavSur 37% complete]. Edge Davao, 13 Feb. 2015.    −In August 2016 it was reported unit 1 was undergoing testing and was planned for commercial operation that month. Unit 2 is planned for end-2016.[http://thestandard.com.ph/business/213287/smc-set-to-open-2-coal-plants.html "SMC set to open 2 coal plants,"] Manila Standard, August 14, 2016 In January 2017, Unit 1 was operating, and Unit 2 was supposedly scheduled for operation by March;[http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Corporate&title=smc&8217s-limay-coal-plant-to-start-commercial-operations-by-may&id=139576 SMC’s Limay coal plant to start commercial operations by May], BusinessWorld, 25 Jan. 2017. however, as of June 2017, Unit 2 had apparently not begun operations.+In August 2016 it was reported Unit 1 was undergoing testing and was planned for commercial operation that month. Unit 2 was planned for the end of 2016.[http://thestandard.com.ph/business/213287/smc-set-to-open-2-coal-plants.html "SMC set to open 2 coal plants,"] Manila Standard, August 14, 2016 As of January 2017, Unit[...]



Show-Me Institute

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:59:46 GMT

added reporters guide ←Older revision Revision as of 15:59, 20 November 2017 Line 1: Line 1: −The '''Show-Me Institute''' (SMI) is a Missouri-based [[think tank]] that describes itself as a nonpartisan "research and educational institute dedicated to improving the quality of life for all citizens of Missouri."Show Me Institute, [http://showmeinstitute.org/about/ About], organizational website, accessed March 2008. However, it is led by wealthy conservatives and Republican campaign staffers.Progress Missouri, [http://www.progressmissouri.org/SMI What Missourians Need to Know About the Show-Me Institute], organizational report, accessed May 2013. It was founded in 2005 by billionaire right-wing political donor [[Rex Sinquefield]].Naomi Schaefer Riley, [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203897404578078551936968168.html Meet One of the Super-PAC Men], ''Wall Street Journal'', October 26, 2012. SMI is a state think tank member of the [[State Policy Network]] (SPN).+The '''Show-Me Institute''' (SMI) is a Missouri-based [[think tank]] that describes itself as a nonpartisan "research and educational institute dedicated to improving the quality of life for all citizens of Missouri."Show Me Institute, [http://showmeinstitute.org/about/ About], organizational website, accessed March 2008. However, it is led by wealthy conservatives and Republican campaign staffers.Progress Missouri, [http://www.progressmissouri.org/SMI What Missourians Need to Know About the Show-Me Institute], organizational report, accessed May 2013. It was founded in 2005 by billionaire right-wing political donor [[Rex Sinquefield]].Naomi Schaefer Riley, [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203897404578078551936968168.html Meet One of the Super-PAC Men], ''Wall Street Journal'', October 26, 2012. You can access the Center for Media and Democracy's Reporter's Guide on Sinquefield and his agenda [https://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/04/12458/new-reporters-guide-documents-rex-sinquefields-effort-railroad-personal-agenda here.]  +   +SMI is a state think tank member of both the [[American Legislative Exchange Council]] and the [[State Policy Network]] (SPN). Click the links to learn more about these institutions.       __TOC__ __TOC__ [...]



Alaska Gas Pipeline

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:29:46 GMT

‎Background: added sources ←Older revision Revision as of 15:29, 20 November 2017 Line 13: Line 13:     ==Background== ==Background==  +The Alaska gas pipeline is a project proposed from the joint efforts between TransCanada Corp. and Exxon Mobile Corp. to develop a natural gas pipeline under the AGIA a.k.a. Alaska Gas Inducement Act, adopted by Alaska Legislature in 2007.[https://web.archive.org/web/20080904222941/http://www.adn.com/money/industries/oil/pipeline/story/255462.html, Palin picks Canadian company for gas line] Weley Loy, The Anchorage Daily News, 4 January 2008 The project originally proposed two options during its open season offering over a three-month period from April 30 to July 30, 2010. An 'open season' in layman's terms is when a company conducts a non-binding show of interest or poll in the marketplace, they ask potential customers "if we build it, will you come?".  +  +The first option was a pipeline from Alaska North Slope through Alaska, the Yukon Territory, British Columbia and to Alberta for a total distance of approx. 1,700 miles. Gas was then to be delivered on through existing pipelines serving the major North American markets. The second option proposed was to transport natural gas from the North Slope to Valdez, AK for a distance of approx. 800 miles. Once in Valdez it would be converted to liquiefied natural gas in facilities built by others and then shipped to North American and International markets. An additional component to each option is a gas treatment plant (GTP) and Point Thomson natural gas pipeline. The proposed building site for the GTP would be at North Slope's Prudhoe Bay facilities which then treats the gas to be shipped in the pipeline. The Point Thomson field would have approximately 58 miles of pipeline to connect natural gas supplies from the field to the plant and the pipeline.  +  +Both options give Alaskan communities the opportunity to acquire natural gas from a minimum of five delivery points along the pipeline. An Alberta option provides for the ability to have local natural gas delivery in Canada.[http://transcanada.com/news-releases-article.html?id=1156196&t=, The Alaska Pipeline Project Begins Its Open Season] TransCanada Corporation, Accessed 20 November 2017 TransCanada has secured state seed money and a license from the state of Alaska to build and operate a pipeline, but does not yet have federal approvals needed to start construction. On June 11, 2009 TransCanada announced it had formed an agreement with ExxonMobil to work together in bringing the gas to market.[https://web.archive.org/web/20090810233054/http://community.adn.com/adn/node/141725, It's on: Exxon and TransCanada announce pipeline partnership (Updated)] Alaska Politics Blog, Archived at Community.adn.com, 10 August 2009  +  +In May 2012 TransCanada formally closed their open season. TransCanada's license with the AGIA required that they file a complete application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in October 2012 for a certificate to build and operate the pipeline. In May 2012 the state of Alaska granted TransCanada a two-year postponment of the deadline to give the company and North Slope producers more time to explore the best market for Alaska gas. By the summer of 2014 the project became more focused [...]



Concepcion power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:19:04 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 15:19, 20 November 2017 Line 13: Line 13:     Unit 2 began construction in late 2016. Completion is planned for 2019.[http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Corporate&title=peakpower-energy-expects-to-launch-2-plants-by-1st-half-of-2017&id=132117 "Peakpower Energy expects to launch 2 plants by 1st half of 2017,"] Business World, Aug 18, 2016 The unit is expected to cost P12 billion, or around $250 million. Financing will come 70% from loans and 30% from internally generated funds.[http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Corporate&title=concepcion-phase-2-plant-to-cost-p11-12-billion&id=130785 Concepcion phase 2 plant to cost P11-12 billion], Business World, 22 July 2016. Unit 2 began construction in late 2016. Completion is planned for 2019.[http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Corporate&title=peakpower-energy-expects-to-launch-2-plants-by-1st-half-of-2017&id=132117 "Peakpower Energy expects to launch 2 plants by 1st half of 2017,"] Business World, Aug 18, 2016 The unit is expected to cost P12 billion, or around $250 million. Financing will come 70% from loans and 30% from internally generated funds.[http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Corporate&title=concepcion-phase-2-plant-to-cost-p11-12-billion&id=130785 Concepcion phase 2 plant to cost P11-12 billion], Business World, 22 July 2016.  +  +==Health effects==  +On October 29, 2017 several residents of Iloilo City got sick after being exposed to an outflow of fly ash from Unit 1 as its chambers were being cleaned.[https://news.mb.com.ph/2017/11/04/no-explosion-in-iloilo-power-plant-residents-safe/ No explosion in Iloilo power plant, residents safe], ''Manilla Bulletin'', 4 Nov 2017     ==Project details== ==Project details== [...]



Alaska Gas Pipeline

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:17:22 GMT

‎Background: added sources ←Older revision Revision as of 15:17, 20 November 2017 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 13: Line 13:     ==Background== ==Background==  +Large natural gas reserves were discovered in Prudhoe Bay in 1967. Talk of a pipeline peaked during the 1973 OPEC oil embargo and several companies came out in favor of large pipeline projects. Canadian Arctic Gas Pipeline, Ltd.—a consortium of large oil companies including Shell, Exxon, and TransCanada—proposed a route from Alaska's Prudhoe Bay across northern Yukon to the Mackenzie Delta, and then south through the Mackenzie Valley to Alberta. In addition, the Foothills Pipeline consortium pursued a competing Mackenzie Valley Pipeline, starting at the Mackenzie Delta and also running along the river valley to Alberta. Either proposal required the approval of the Canadian government, which named Thomas Berger to lead an inquiry into the proposals. Berger's inquiry resulted in a recommendation for a ten-year moratorium on development of the pipeline to deal with issues such as Aboriginal land claims and setting aside of conservation areas.  +  +In the United States, three competing applications were filed with the Federal Power Commission to construct a natural gas pipeline from Prudhoe Bay. A proposal sponsored by El Paso Corporation routed the pipeline to Valdez along the oil pipeline route with LNG tankers then transporting the gas to terminals on the west coast. The other two proposals would cross Canada on a route parallel to the Alaska Highway. The Federal Power Commission conducted lengthy hearings on the relative merits of the three plans, and under the Natural Gas Act[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/717, 15 U.S. Code § 717 - Regulation of natural gas companies], Accessed via the Legal Information Institute, Accessed 20 November 2017 the Commission had the legal right to select the final route. Following the 1976 elections where John McMillian, CEO of Northwest Pipeline was a major supporter of Jimmy Carter, President Carter proposed special legislation to transfer the task of selecting a project from the Federal Power Commission to the President. Congress adopted the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1977,[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/719, 15 U.S. Code § 719 - Congressional findings], Accessed via the Legal Information Institute, Accessed 20 November 2017 and Carter selected the project sponsored by Northwest to the exclusion of the other two projects. The Commission then proceeded to conduct further proceedings to issue certificates of public convenience and necessity to authorize construction of pipelines from Prudhoe Bay and extending to San Francisco and Chicago, and the United States and Canada entered into an agreement regarding having the gas pipeline follow the Alaskan Highway route.  +  +In 1981 to 1982 test sites were built at 7 locations next to the oil pipeline over a 600-mile spread with pipes buried in the ground circulating a glycol solution to simulate gas flowing in the pipes chilled at 10 Deg F. to study the effects on the permafrost and collect temperature and movement data. This was built over a two-year period and ran for another 2 years. Data was stored on cassette tapes and changed weekly[...]



Calaca power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:47:18 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 14:47, 20 November 2017 Line 21: Line 21:     ===Phases II & III=== ===Phases II & III=== −Two additional 350-MW coal-fired units are being planned, as phases II & III. The two units would be built by St. Raphael Power Generation Corp., a Semirara subsidiary (which is, in turn, a DMCI subsidiary). The two additional phases would cost $1.4 billion.[http://www.philstar.com/business/2016/11/23/1646395/marubeni-taking-20-stake-calaca-coal-power-plant Marubeni taking 20% stake in Calaca coal power plant], ''Philippine Star'', 23 Nov. 2016.+Two additional 350-MW coal-fired units are being planned, as Phases II and III. The two units would be built by St. Raphael Power Generation Corp., a Semirara subsidiary (which is, in turn, a DMCI subsidiary). The two additional phases would cost $1.4 billion.[http://www.philstar.com/business/2016/11/23/1646395/marubeni-taking-20-stake-calaca-coal-power-plant Marubeni taking 20% stake in Calaca coal power plant], ''Philippine Star'', 23 Nov. 2016.     As of August 2013, financing discussions for Expansion Phase II were ongoing. The target completion date for Phase II is 2016-17. In May 2014, DMCI announced that Phase II would be switched from two 150-MW units to a single 350-MW unit. The expansion is slated to cost P20 billion ($450 million), with a 70-30% loan-equity split. Later in 2014, an additional 350-MW Phase III was announced, with no planned completion date. As of August 2013, financing discussions for Expansion Phase II were ongoing. The target completion date for Phase II is 2016-17. In May 2014, DMCI announced that Phase II would be switched from two 150-MW units to a single 350-MW unit. The expansion is slated to cost P20 billion ($450 million), with a 70-30% loan-equity split. Later in 2014, an additional 350-MW Phase III was announced, with no planned completion date. Line 27: Line 27:  In July 2016 DMCI Holdings entered a 50-50 joint venture with Manila Electric to build the 700 MW phases II and III (units 5-6) of the expansion.[http://thestandard.com.ph/business/211719/meralco-dmci-to-build-new-coal-plant.html "Meralco, DMCI to build new coal plant,"] The Standard, July 27, 2016 In November 2016, the Japanese [[Marubeni Corporation]] took a 20% equity stake in the project; DMCI and Manila Electric would each take 40%. In July 2016 DMCI Holdings entered a 50-50 joint venture with Manila Electric to build the 700 MW phases II and III (units 5-6) of the expansion.[http://thestandard.com.ph/business/211719/meralco-dmci-to-build-new-coal-plant.html "Meralco, DMCI to build new coal plant,"] The Standard, July 27, 2016 In November 2016, the Japanese [[Marubeni Corporation]] took a 20% equity stake in the project; DMCI and Manila Electric would each take 40%.    −As of November 2016, the consortium was in talks with U.S. firm [[Black & Veatch]] to serve as construction contractor. The project was also still waiting for permits from the Energy Regulatory Commission.<[...]



Access South Gas Pipeline

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:46:19 GMT

‎Opposition ←Older revision Revision as of 14:46, 20 November 2017 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 18: Line 18:     ==Opposition== ==Opposition== −A septet of regional environmental organizations opposed the project. The environmental organizations asked FERC to prepare a more extensive programatic environmental impact statement rather than a less comprehensive environmental assessment proposed by Texas Eastern Transmission.[http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/103646-three-tetco-proposals-for-marcellus-utica-pipes-targeted-by-environmental-groups Three Tetco proposals for Marcellus, Utica pipes targeted by environmental groups,] NGI's Daily Gas Price Index, 14 Sep. 2015  +A septet of regional environmental organizations opposed the project. The environmental organizations asked FERC to prepare a more extensive programatic environmental impact statement rather than a less comprehensive environmental assessment proposed by Texas Eastern Transmission. The groups include Allegheny Defense Project, Buckeye Forest Council, Center for Biological Diversity, FreshWater Accountability Project, Heartwood, Kentucky Heartwood, and Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition.[http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/103646-three-tetco-proposals-for-marcellus-utica-pipes-targeted-by-environmental-groups Three Tetco proposals for Marcellus, Utica pipes targeted by environmental groups,] NGI's Daily Gas Price Index, 14 Sep. 2015  +   ==Articles and resources== ==Articles and resources==  ===References=== ===References=== [...]



Penuelas LNG Terminal

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:35:49 GMT

copy edit

←Older revision Revision as of 14:35, 20 November 2017
Line 1: Line 1:
{{#badges:FrackSwarm|Navbar-LNGterminals}}'''Penuelas (Panuelas) LNG Terminal''' is an LNG terminal in Penuelas, Puerto Rico.
+
{{#badges:FrackSwarm|Navbar-LNGterminals}}'''Penuelas (Panuelas) LNG Terminal''' is an LNG import terminal in Penuelas, Puerto Rico.
  
 
==Location==
 
==Location==



Cadiz City power station

Mon, 20 Nov 2017 14:13:25 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 14:13, 20 November 2017 Line 15: Line 15:  In February 2016 Cadiz mayor Patrick Escalante expressed reservations about the project, saying the city had enough power, and that Negros Occidental was now primarily focused on renewable energy generation.[http://www.sunstar.com.ph/bacolod/business/2016/02/26/coal-terminal-boosts-income-cadiz-city-459381 "Coal terminal boosts income of Cadiz City,"] Sun Star, February 26, 2016 In February 2016 Cadiz mayor Patrick Escalante expressed reservations about the project, saying the city had enough power, and that Negros Occidental was now primarily focused on renewable energy generation.[http://www.sunstar.com.ph/bacolod/business/2016/02/26/coal-terminal-boosts-income-cadiz-city-459381 "Coal terminal boosts income of Cadiz City,"] Sun Star, February 26, 2016    −As of June 2017 there has been no news about this project since mid-2015.+As of November 2017 there has been no news about this project since mid-2015.     ==Ownership== ==Ownership== [...]



Hardin Generating Station

Sun, 19 Nov 2017 03:36:57 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 03:36, 19 November 2017 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 1: Line 1:  {{#Badges:CoalSwarm}} {{#Badges:CoalSwarm}} −The '''Hardin Generating Station''' is located in southern Montana, on the northern outskirts of Hardin.  +The '''Hardin Generating Station''' is a 116-megawatt (MW) coal-fired power station in Big Horn, Montana.    −It is owned by [[Rocky Mountain Power]] which is a subsidiary of [[Centennial Power]], which in turn is a subsidiary of [[Bicent Power Company]].[http://www.coloradoenergy.com/hardin.htm "Hardin Generating Station"], Colorado Energy Management, undated, accessed January 2008. Rocky Mountain Power had the rights rights to construct the plant and was taken over by Centennial Power in March 2002.[http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2003_Feb_5/ai_97281891 "MDU Resources Creates New Business Unit"], Media Release, Business Wire,  February 5, 2003.  +In November 2017 owner Heorot Power said if the company can't find a buyer for the facility, it could close by the first or second quarter of 2018, as the plant has suffered economic losses since 2014.[http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/owners-of-hardin-coal-fired-power-plant-announce-exit-in/article_d7361054-cbfa-5d3b-81df-f9cff8e87a3c.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share "Owners of Hardin coal-fired power plant announce exit in 2018,"] Billings Gazette, Nov 17, 2017  +   +==Location==  +The plant is located in southern Montana, on the northern outskirts of Hardin.  +{{#display_map:  +39.709539, -86.195941  +|width=600  +|height=600  +|type=satellite  +|zoom=18  +}}  +   +==Background==  +Rocky Mountain Power is the local entity that owns the plant. It's operated by Colorado Energy, which is owned by Heorot Power, a subsidiary of Beowulf Energy.[http://www.coloradoenergy.com/hardin.htm "Hardin Generating Station"], Colorado Energy Management, undated, accessed January 2008. Rocky Mountain Power had the rights rights to construct the plant and was taken over by Centennial Power in March 2002.[http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2003_Feb_5/ai_97281891 "MDU Resources Creates New Business Unit"], Media Release, Business Wire,  February 5, 2003.       The plant was built and is being operated by [[Colorado Energy Management]], which is also a subsidiary of Centennial Power. (Both Centennial Power and Colorado Energy Management were part of the [[MDU Resources Group]] until they were bought by Bicent in July 2007.)[http://markets.chron.com/chron?GUID=2571798&Page=MediaViewer&Ticker=MDU "Bicent Power Completes Acquisition of Centennial Power and Colorado Energy Management From MDU Resources"], Media Release, ''Chron.com'', July 10, 2007. The plant was built and is being operated by [[Colorado Energy Management]], which is also a subsidiary of Centennial Power[...]



Ussuriysk power station

Sun, 19 Nov 2017 01:37:53 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 01:37, 19 November 2017 Line 12: Line 12:     ===2015 rebirth=== ===2015 rebirth=== −In September 2015, after years of no apparent movement, the project was rejuvenated with Chinese support: the city government of Mudanjiang, about 200 km away from Ussuriysk, across the border in the Chinese province of Heilongjiang, announced the "Amur Energo-Stroy Alliance" with RAO Energy Systems of East, in an agreement also signed by the Russian government. News reports noted that the previous Ussuriysk project had faced financial and regulatory difficulties, but experts believed that now that a "political solution" had been reached, the plant will be built. The project has apparently been scaled back to 226 MW, and the power would be exported to Mudanjiang. The plant would be located on the northwest outskirts of Ussuriysk, and would burn coal from the Rakovski and Pavlovsk coalfields, 30 km from Ussuriysk. The project was scheduled to be completed in 2019.[http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2804931 Уссурийскую ТЭЦ переводят в реанимацию], ''Kommersant'', 8 Sept. 2015.[http://rao-esv.com/press-center/RAOESVostokaiAmurEnergoStroyAlyanszaymutsyastroitelstvomUssuriyskoyTETS/ РАО ЭС Востока и Амур Энерго-Строй Альянс займутся строительством Уссурийской ТЭЦ], RAO Energy Systems of East press release, 5 Sept. 2015. However, as of June 2017 there had been no further news on the project since this announcement in 2015.+In September 2015, after years of no apparent movement, the project was rejuvenated with Chinese support: the city government of Mudanjiang, about 200 km away from Ussuriysk, across the border in the Chinese province of Heilongjiang, announced the "Amur Energo-Stroy Alliance" with RAO Energy Systems of East, in an agreement also signed by the Russian government. News reports noted that the previous Ussuriysk project had faced financial and regulatory difficulties, but experts believed that now that a "political solution" had been reached, the plant will be built. The project has apparently been scaled back to 226 MW, and the power would be exported to Mudanjiang. The plant would be located on the northwest outskirts of Ussuriysk, and would burn coal from the Rakovski and Pavlovsk coalfields, 30 km from Ussuriysk. The project was scheduled to be completed in 2019.[http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2804931 Уссурийскую ТЭЦ переводят в реанимацию], ''Kommersant'', 8 Sept. 2015.[http://rao-esv.com/press-center/RAOESVostokaiAmurEnergoStroyAlyanszaymutsyastroitelstvomUssuriyskoyTETS/ РАО ЭС Востока и Амур Энерго-Строй Альянс займутся строительством Уссурийской ТЭЦ], RAO Energy Systems of East press release, 5 Sept. 2015.    +   +However, as of November 2017 there had been no further news on the project since this announcement in September 2015, and plans appear to be shelved.    &[...]



Troitskaya GRES power station

Sun, 19 Nov 2017 01:27:59 GMT

‎Project Details for Units 10 & 11 ←Older revision Revision as of 01:27, 19 November 2017 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 13: Line 13:  *Stage 3: Units 8-9: 2 x 485 MW (1974-76) *Stage 3: Units 8-9: 2 x 485 MW (1974-76)    −In 2008, OGK-2 began a modernization overhaul of the Troitskaya plant. Units 4, 5, 7, and 8 were modernized and equipped with modern pollution controls in 2008-2013.[http://chelyabinsk.74.ru/text/newsline/606071.html Троицкая ГРЭС за год вдвое снизила выбросы золы], Chelyabinsk.ru, 28 Dec. 2012.[http://www.bigpowernews.ru/news/document44879.phtml «Силовые машины» досрочно изготовили турбогенератор на 525 МВт для Троицкой ГРЭС «ОГК-2»], Big Power Electric news, 24 Sept. 2012. Unit 9 was shut down in early 2013, and part of the plant's workforce was laid off; with this, the plant's nameplate capacity was technically reduced to 1,574 MW.[http://www.bigpowernews.ru/news/document47222.phtml На Троицкой ГРЭС (ОГК-2) могут сократить 159 человек из-за вывода из эксплуатации 9−го энергоблока на 485 МВт], Big Power Electric News, Jan. 16, 2013.+In 2008, OGK-2 began a modernization overhaul of the Troitskaya plant. Units 4, 5, 7, and 8 were modernized and equipped with modern pollution controls in 2008-2013. Unit 6 was dismantled.[http://chelyabinsk.74.ru/text/newsline/606071.html Троицкая ГРЭС за год вдвое снизила выбросы золы], Chelyabinsk.ru, 28 Dec. 2012.[http://www.bigpowernews.ru/news/document44879.phtml «Силовые машины» досрочно изготовили турбогенератор на 525 МВт для Троицкой ГРЭС «ОГК-2»], Big Power Electric news, 24 Sept. 2012. Unit 9 was shut down in early 2013, and part of the plant's workforce was laid off; with this, the plant's nameplate capacity was technically reduced to 1,574 MW.[http://www.bigpowernews.ru/news/document47222.phtml На Троицкой ГРЭС (ОГК-2) могут сократить 159 человек из-за вывода из эксплуатации 9−го энергоблока на 485 МВт], Big Power Electric News, Jan. 16, 2013.     The plant has historically been relatively efficient, and thus its power is in very high demand; however, in 2011, the plant experienced substantial production problems, falling to a capacity-utilization rate of only 24% in that year.[http://www.ogk2.ru/upload/1453_1_GO_OGK_2_2011_02.pdf OGK-2 2012 Annual Report], pp. 14, 55, 103-4. The plant has historically been relatively efficient, and thus its power is in very high demand; however, in 2011, the plant experienced substantial production problems, falling to a capacity-utilization rate of only 24% in that year.[http://www.ogk2.ru/upload/1453_1[...]



Yakutskaya SDPP-2 power station

Sun, 19 Nov 2017 01:08:03 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 01:08, 19 November 2017 Line 1: Line 1: −{{#badges:CoalSwarm|Navbar-Russiacoal}}'''Yakutskaya SDPP-2 power station''' is a combined heat and power coal plant under construction in Sakha (Yakutia) Republic, Russia.+{{#badges:CoalSwarm|Navbar-Russiacoal}}'''Yakutskaya SDPP-2 power station''' is a gas plant under construction in Sakha (Yakutia) Republic, Russia.     ==Location==   ==Location==   Line 7: Line 7:     ==Background on Plant== ==Background on Plant== −According to RussHydro, the project is one of four under construction. It is listed at 170 MW.[http://www.eng.rushydro.ru/company_geography/ "Company geography,"] RusHydro, accessed October 2016 Another report placed the electrical output of the plant at 193 MW, with thermal capacity of 469 Gcal/h. The project is a "state district power plant," or SDPP, also known as a combined heating and power (CHP) facility.[http://www.akm.ru/eng/news/2015/january/20/ns5065252.htm "Supply of waste heat boilers started to Yakutskaya SDPP-2,"] AK&M News Service, 20 January 2015+According to RussHydro, the project is one of four under construction. It is listed at 170 MW.[http://www.eng.rushydro.ru/company_geography/ "Company geography,"] RusHydro, accessed October 2016 Another report placed the electrical output of the plant at 193 MW, with thermal capacity of 469 Gcal/h. The project is a "state district power plant," or SDPP.[http://www.akm.ru/eng/news/2015/january/20/ns5065252.htm "Supply of waste heat boilers started to Yakutskaya SDPP-2,"] AK&M News Service, 20 January 2015     ==Project Details==   ==Project Details==   Line 16: Line 16:  *'''Status:''' Construction *'''Status:''' Construction  *'''Gross Capacity:''' 170 MW *'''Gross Capacity:''' 170 MW −*'''Type:''' combined heating and power (CHP)+*'''Type:'''   −*'''Projected in service:'''+*'''Projected in service:''' 2017 −*'''Coal Type:'''  +*'''Coal Type:''' N/A (gas plant) −*'''Coal Source:'''   +*'''Coal Source:''' N/A (gas plant)    *'''Source of financing:''' *'''Source of financing:'''    [...]



Sovetskaya Gavan power station

Sun, 19 Nov 2017 01:06:03 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 01:06, 19 November 2017 (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 9: Line 9:  In June 2007, Far Eastern Generating Company (a subsidiary of [[RusHydro]]) announced its plans to build a two-unit, 120-MW coal-fired power plant in the Sovetskaya Gavan area, in order to meet power needs for the growing commodity (especially coal) port in Vanino.[http://vladivostoktimes.com/show/?id=11163 Far Eastern Generating Company Will Build a Power Plant in Sovetskaya Gavan], ''Vladivostok Times'', June 18, 2007. After substantial delays — partly due to lack of funding, and partly due to inadequate infrastructure in the area — RusHydro signed a financing agreement with [[Sberbank]] in March 2013, providing $1.4 billion in financing for several projects in the Far East.[http://business.highbeam.com/407705/article-1G1-323956951/rushydro-sberbank-sign-banking-services-agreement-power RusHydro, Sberbank Sign Banking Services Agreement for Power Plant Construction], Highbeam Business, Mar. 27, 2013.[http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1962684 Инвесторы подождут ТЭЦ], ''Kommersant'', June 21, 2012. In June 2007, Far Eastern Generating Company (a subsidiary of [[RusHydro]]) announced its plans to build a two-unit, 120-MW coal-fired power plant in the Sovetskaya Gavan area, in order to meet power needs for the growing commodity (especially coal) port in Vanino.[http://vladivostoktimes.com/show/?id=11163 Far Eastern Generating Company Will Build a Power Plant in Sovetskaya Gavan], ''Vladivostok Times'', June 18, 2007. After substantial delays — partly due to lack of funding, and partly due to inadequate infrastructure in the area — RusHydro signed a financing agreement with [[Sberbank]] in March 2013, providing $1.4 billion in financing for several projects in the Far East.[http://business.highbeam.com/407705/article-1G1-323956951/rushydro-sberbank-sign-banking-services-agreement-power RusHydro, Sberbank Sign Banking Services Agreement for Power Plant Construction], Highbeam Business, Mar. 27, 2013.[http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1962684 Инвесторы подождут ТЭЦ], ''Kommersant'', June 21, 2012.    −With financing in place, initial site construction for the project began in August 2013. Far Eastern Generating Company now has plans to expand the project to 360 MW at a later date.[http://ria.ru/energetics_fe/20131203/981673467.html Проект строительства ТЭЦ в г. Советская Гавань], ''RIA Novosti'', Dec. 3, 2013.[http://www.daltekhenergo.ru/news/khabarovskaya-remontno-stroitelnaya-kompaniya-vedet-stroitelstvo-obektov-transportnoy-infrastruktury/ Хабаровская ремонтно-строительная компания ведет строительство объектов транспортной инфраструктуры Совгаванской ТЭЦ], Daltekhenergo w[...]