Carbon Energy Ltd. has filed a Home Country News Release – ASX Conference Presentation To view the full release click here (link to PDF).
Apocalyptic predictions are circulating about the size of electricity bills in 2030 if the move to green power goes ahead. There is no need for them to come true
The UK’s energy policy is not “plausible” and a “crisis” is inevitable. That is the view of Peter Atherton, a respected utilities analyst who works for Liberum Capital, an investment bank in the City.
Atherton is convinced that successive UK governments have grossly underestimated the engineering, financial and economic challenges posed by the planned move from a high-carbon electricity sector to a low-carbon one.
He believes that the cost of switching from largely coal- and gas-fired power stations to a mix of gas-, wind- and nuclear-generated electricity will cost more than £160bn by 2020 and more than £375bn 10 years later. He warns that it means “electricity bills rising by at least 30% by 2020 and 100% by 2030 in real terms.”
That would be political dynamite and Atherton knows it. He predicts that there will be three groups of “casualties”: the government, consumers and investors.
This apocalyptic scenario – contained in an investment note issued last week – will warm the hearts of many in the City (and possibly some in the Treasury) who believe the green agenda is a giant waste of money.
It will alarm the wider community who accept that climate change must be tackled, and those who believe a “carbon bubble” is developing around fossil fuel companies whose assets are overvalued in a world turning away from coal and oil.
And it is clearly at odds with the ideas of ministers such as Ed Davey, the energy secretary, whose Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) calculated last month that “household dual fuel bills are estimated to be on average 11% (or £166) less in 2020 than they would be without policies being pursued.” Those figures do, however, involve some heroic assumptions about energy-efficiency measures being
This interactive map reveals which nations’ stock exchanges are most exposed to the ‘carbon bubble’
Carbon Energy Ltd. has filed a Home Country News Release – Carbon Energy Shareholder Update To view the full release click here (link to PDF).
Category : World News
< ?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
ALDILA Closes Merger Agreement with Mitsubishi Rayon America
POWAY, Calif., March 28, 2013
POWAY, Calif., March 28, 2013 /PRNewswire/ — ALDILA, INC. (formerly OTCQX:ALDA) announced today that Aldila has closed the merger (the “Merger”) as contemplated by the merger agreement (the “Merger Agreement”) with Mitsubishi Rayon America, Inc. (“MRA”). The official effective time of the merger will be April 1, 2013.
Shareholders, upon delivery of their shares and a transmittal letter to the paying agent pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, will receive cash consideration of $4.00 per share. Trading in Aldila’s shares on OTCQX was terminated at the close of trading on March 28, 2013.
Aldila, which merged with a wholly-owned subsidiary of MRA, will continue as the surviving corporation and has become a wholly-owned subsidiary of MRA. MRA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mitsubishi Rayon Co., Ltd. (“MRC”) and part of the Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Corporation group.
Aldila’s Board of Directors (“Board”) unanimously approved the Merger, which was also approved by Aldila’s stockholders. Joining with MRC will better enable Aldila to capitalize on Aldila’s business opportunities offered by the growing demand for carbon fiber based materials in a number of industries. The sale will allow Aldila to leverage MRC’s resources to more effectively take advantage of the business opportunities open to Aldila.
“Aldila has joined a world class Advanced Composite Materials company that is fully integrated from the base raw material acrylonitrile, precursor, carbon fiber and prepreg materials. MRC also offers a leading global graphite golf shaft product line-up under the Mitsubishi Rayon brand. We see unique synergies and opportunities for growing our two business segments of Composite Products and Composite Materials by joining with Mitsubishi Rayon,” said Peter Mathewson, Aldila’s CEO.
Aldila, Inc. is one of the world’s largest manufacturers of carbon fiber shafts. Aldila, Inc. is a designer, manufacturer and marketer of carbon-based composite products and materials used in various end markets. Aldila’s competencies are the development of carbon-based composites and the implementation of manufacturing processes that support the commercialization of these composites. Aldila is a vertically-integrated supplier of composites across three primary end markets: carbon-based pre-impregnated composite fibers, graphite golf shafts and archery products.
You may find additional information about Aldila’s business, financial results and operations through the closing date of the Merger agreement in Aldila’s annual report and quarterly reports, on Aldila’s website at www.aldila.com and on the OTCQX.com website. Aldila’s annual report to stockholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, and quarterly reports through the quarter ended September 30, 2012, have been filed with the OTCQX and are available on Aldila’s website and on the OTCQX.com website. Aldila’s shares ceased trading on OTCQX on March 28, 2013, and Aldila will not be providing independent financial information after that date.
Mitsubishi Rayon America Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Mitsubishi Rayon Co., Ltd. MRA’s business is centered around MMA (methyl methacrylate) and AN (acrylonitrile) business complexes as basic raw materials and finished products. For more information, visit http://www.mrany.com.
Mitsubishi Rayon Co., Ltd. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Corporation. MRC’s business is centered around chemical and plastics, fibers, carbon fibers and composite materials, and aqua businesses. For more information, visit http://www.mrc.co.jp
This press release contains forward-looking statements based on Aldila’s expectations as of the date of this press release. These statements necessarily reflect assumptions that Aldila makes in evaluating its expectations as to the future. Forward-looking statements are necessarily subject to risks and uncertainties, including those relating to the closing of the proposed merger. Aldila’s actual future performance and results could differ from that contained in or suggested by these forward-looking statements as a result of a variety of factors. Aldila’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (for filings prior to its move to OTCQX U.S. Premier) and OTC Disclosure and News Service present a detailed discussion of the principal risks and uncertainties related to Aldila’s future operations. In particular the Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2011, and Quarterly Reports and Current Reports, discuss Aldila’s business, financial condition, and risk factors. All of these materials may be obtained on the OTCQX U.S. Premier website, which can be found at www. OTCQX.com, or at Aldila’s website, www.aldila.com.
SOURCE ALDILA, INC.
Forecasts suggest that gas supplies will be exhausted by 8 April, requiring Britain to import from Norway and Russia
The cold snap in March could lead to Britain’s gas supplies running out next month, forcing the nation to pay higher prices for fuel from elsewhere. Forecasts suggest that gas supplies in the UK will be exhausted by 8 April, requiring Britain to turn to imports from Norway and Russia.
The warning came on the day Scottish and Southern Energy, one of the UK’s biggest power suppliers, warned that there could be electricity blackouts in the country within three years.
A lack of gas storage facilities, and rapid depletion at the UK’s North Sea gas fields, has led to the UK having as little as two days’ supply of the fuel in reserve. Demand spiked during the coldest March in 50 years.
Though experts have warned of the problem for years, and the government has championed a “dash for gas” that would see a massive rise in demand for the fuel, little has been done to increase storage facilities.
Ian Marchant, chief executive of SSE, said there was a “very real risk of the lights going out” within the next three years. SSE intends shutting down power plants, enough to have supplied 2m homes, as the stations are either uneconomic or coming to the end of their lives.
Other firms are also planning to take power stations out of service, including the UK’s fleet of ageing nuclear reactors, increasing the risk that demand for electricity will exceed the available supply.
Marchant said: “It appears the government is significantly underestimating the scale of the capacity crunch facing the UK in the next three years and there is a very real risk of the lights going out as a result.”
His comments follow warnings by Alistair Buchanan, the departing chief of Ofgem, that power shortages will be many times more likely in the next five years. Government estimates suggest that energy bills could rise by £100 a year this winter.
The warnings are a particular blow to George Osborne, the chancellor, who has championed a new “dash for gas” in the UK, that would see gas take over as the dominant fuel in the UK’s power generation market.
Much of the generating capacity that SSE plans to retire consists of gas-fired power stations, though the recent budget has given tax breaks for shale gas extraction in the UK and heralded what could be the biggest expansion of UK gas-fired power in a generation.
SSE said gas-fired power was uneconomic because of the fuel’s high price compared with coal.
The move by SSE highlights the disputes over energy policy and energy generation, following upheavals in the international markets for fossil fuels. It also brings into question whether targets to cut carbon dioxide can be met.
Andrew Pendleton, head of campaigns at Friends of the Earth, said energy firms were trying to hold the government to ransom by threatening power outages that would help them extract concessions to get financial benefits. The UK has only six big energy suppliers to households, which campaigners say reduces competition and raises prices.
Coal has become much cheaper because of the use of fossil fuel in the US in the past five years, where a massive increase in the supply of cheap gas is attributed to fracking, the controversial method of blasting dense rocks apart under high pressure.
The coal that would have been burned in the US is now available on international markets at cut-price, and has now become “the preferred fuel”, according to SSE.
That is the opposite of what the government, and the EU intended by their energy policies in the past decade. Coal was supposed to become more expensive than gas, because of the EU’s emissions trading scheme, which puts a price on carbon emissions.
That has not happened, because flaws within the system mean the price of carbon is near an all-time low, meaning coal-fired power stations are not penalised for their effect on the climate.
Marchant urged the government to bring forward reforms favouring gas. “The government can reduce this risk [of power cuts] very easily, by taking swift action to provide much greater clarity on its electricity market reforms.”
An energy bill is under discussion by parliament at the moment.
SSE’s warnings were dismissed by green campaigners as “an attempt to force the government’s hand”.
Pendleton said: “The risk is that these companies are holding us to ransom, in order to make the environment more favourable to their forms of generation. There is a lot at stake here. Basing our energy strategy on gas rather than clean forms of energy such as renewables means we could be held to ransom more and more in the future in this way. It could do a huge amount of harm.”
The government rebuffed the claims from SSE. John Hayes, minister for energy, said: “We’re alive to the challenge facing us. The bill before parliament will set the conditions for the investment needed to keep Britain’s lights on in the long-term. The amount of spare power available today is currently comfortable. As old infrastructure closes over the coming years we expect this margin to reduce but we will make sure it stays manageable.”
Most of the UK’s nuclear power plants are slated for closure by 2022, and many coal-fired stations must be closed or run at reduced capacity within the next few years because of EU rules on pollution.
Experts have warned for years of a looming “energy gap” between demand and supply. The building of wind farms and other forms of renewable energy, which were supposed to fill the gap, has been below expectations, in part due to planning laws.
Hayes said: “We are not complacent about this… We are confident in our approach and in the responsiveness of the market in providing secure power supplies.”
Joss Garman, political director of Greenpeace, said: “Not content with the profits they’re making from sky-high energy bills the gas industry now seems to be trying to hold everybody to ransom – ‘give us even more of your cash or we’ll turn out the lights’.
“Cheap coal and the collapse of the carbon price have made gas burning less profitable, but that’s a reason to ban unabated coal burning and reform the carbon market, not to give hand-outs to the big six energy companies.
“Gas-fired generation should only be a last-ditch backup for renewable energy sources, and [ministers] should prioritise support for interconnectors, storage, and combined heat and power stations that would compliment renewables and guarantee we have secure power.”
Members of pressure group who occupied energy firm’s plant in West Burton last year urge switch to smaller, greener suppliers
A group of environmental campaigners being sued for £5m by energy company EDF for occupying one of the company’s power plants in October last year has launched a website encouraging EDF customers to switch to alternative providers as a gesture of opposition to the civil action.
Members of the campaign group “No Dash for Gas” occupied EDF’s gas-fired power plant in West Burton for a week in October last year, protesting against fossil fuels and carbon emissions. Last month, 21 activists pleaded guilty to charges of aggravated trespass, and face possible custodial terms when they are sentenced later this month and in April.
Separately, EDF initiated civil proceedings against 21 of the campaigners to recoup what it says were damages in excess of £5m caused by the protest, a figure that includes staff and labour costs, delays to the completion of the station, specialist security and lost carbon emission credits.
The parents of one of the campaigners started a Change.org petition against the civil action two weeks ago, which has attracted more than 63,000 signatures, including those of Naomi Klein, Margaret Atwood, Richard Dawkins and Mark Ruffalo.
Supporters have created a stand-alone website, EDF*off, promoted via social media, giving their perspective on the case and encouraging readers to switch to small, green energy providers as a result of the civil action. The site claims the civil action is an attempt to stifle protest: “The civil lawsuit represents just 10 hours’ profit for EDF, yet could result in protesters losing their homes and being saddled with lifelong debts,” it claims. “It’s a tactic to deter more people from taking urgently needed action on climate change.”
The move follows messages left on Facebook and Twitter from people claiming to be EDF customers incensed at the move.
One Twitter user warned EDF they were “losing 5 business contracts with us for life because you’re attempting to sue those protesters”, while several dozen Facebook users wrote on EDF’s wall to say they were switching away from the provider in the days after details of the civil action were first published in the Guardian.
EDF said it supports the right to protest, but said a civil action against protesters was necessary.
“EDF Energy supports the right to lawful protest and respects differing points of view. However, the consequences of this illegal activity put lives at risk, caused considerable disruption to the site during its construction, and considerable financial losses,” said a spokesman. “It is important that those considering this kind of action understand that they may face consequences through civil action for the damage, cost and disruption they cause.”