Coal Insights - Mar 2012

EDITORIALChief EditorRakesh Dubey, Tel: +91 91633 48159, Email: [email protected]

Executive EditorArindam Bandyopadhyay, Tel: +91 91633 48016Email: [email protected]

Editorial BoardAlok Srivastava, General Manager, MMTC LtdAmitabh Panda, Group Director (Shipping & Logistics Operations), Tata Steel GroupAnirudha Gupta, Director, P&H JoyMining Equipment India LtdAshok Jain, Managing Director, Saumya Mining LtdDeepak Bhattacharyya, Head – coaljunction, mjunction services ltdGanesan Natarajan, WT Director, President & CEO, Ennore Coke LtdLawrence Metzroth, Vice President – Analysis & Strategy, Arch Coal IncM K Palanivel, President – All India Bulk, Samsara GroupP S Bhattacharyya, Managing Director, Haldia Petrochemicals LtdS N Choubey, Head – Commercial, ABG Cement LtdSandeep Kumar, Managing Director, S & T Mining Co Pvt LtdSuresh Thawani, Managing Director, Tata Sponge Iron Ltd

AdvertisingSoumitra Bose, Tel: +91 92310 00232, Email: [email protected] Jalan, Tel: +91 91633 48243, Email: [email protected]

SubscriptionRachita Das, Tel: +91 91633 48045, Email: [email protected]

DesignDebal Ray, Ishawer Kumar Sriwastva, Sobhan Jas

For suggestions, feedback and queries, please write [email protected]

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of Coal Insights can be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means without the prior permission of mjunction services limited. Please inform us if any copyright has been inadvertently infringed.

Disclaimer: This document is for information purpose only. Certain information herein has been acquired from various external sources believed to be reliable. While we have taken reasonable care to compile this report, we in no way assume any responsibility for any error or discrepancy in regards to information contained herein. Readers are requested to make appropriate judgment without any prejudice or compulsion.

Registered Officemjunction services limited, Tata Centre, 43 J L Nehru Rd, Kolkata 700 071

Website: www.mjunction.in

Corporate Head Quarters: Godrej Waterside, 3rd Floor, Tower 1, Plot V, Block DP, Sector V, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, Tel: +91 33 6610 6100, Fax: +91 33 6610 6187 Bhilai: Room 321, 3rd Floor, Ispat Bhavan, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai 490001, Tel: +91 788 6451066, Tele/Fax: +91 788 2221071 Bokaro: Room 19, Old Admin Bldg., Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro 827001, Tel/Fax: +91 654 2226132 Burnpur: SAIL - IISCO Steel Plant, Materials Building, Order Department, Ground Floor, Burnpur 713325, Telfax: +91 341 2240107 Chennai: Basement, Begum Ispahani Complex, New No 91, Old No 44, Armenian Street, Chennai 600 001, Tel: +91 44 64624733-35, Fax: +91 44 25216536 Durgapur: Room 618, Ispat Bhavan, Durgapur Steel Plant, Durgapur 713203, Tel: +91 343 6510185, Tele/Fax: +91 343 2586946 Jamshedpur: Kashi Kunj, Ground Floor, Road No. 02, Contractors Area, Bistupur, Jamshedpur 831001, Tel: +91 657 6519985/86/90/91, Fax: +91 657 2230040 Mumbai: Jolly Bhavan II, 403, 4th Floor, 7 New Marine Lines, Mumbai 400002, Tel: +91 22 66510663, Tele/Fax: +91 22 66510662 New Delhi: C127, 2nd Floor, A One Plaza, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase I, New Delhi 110028, Tel: +91 11 65661774/65413288, Tele/Fax: +91 11 25897000 Noamundi: C/o TATA Steel Limited, Mines Purchase Cell, PO: Noamundi, Singbhum (West), Jharkhand 833 217, Tel: +91 9204791638/9234368606 Rourkela: Administrative Bldg., Room 624, 6th Flr, Rourkela Steel Plant, Rourkela 769011, Tel: +91 661 6514142/6511412

mjunction believes that all junctionites, customers, suppliers, partners, etc should practice the highest ethical standards in their daily operations.

Report a concern to [email protected]

Dear Readers,

Welcome back to your senses after Budget 2012…! This year, as in most years, there was something for

everybody…the progressive, the regressive, the moderate, the excessive. And also for those who are bored with Budget. Opening the session, the Railway Budget (allegedly) dished out a ‘drama’ and then the Finance Minister quoted a (Shakespearean) play. All for the aam admi…!

On a serious note, the Budget 2012 had precious little for the mining and mineral sector. But of course, the long standing demand from power producers for removal of duty on thermal coal import was paid heed to, much to the dismay of Coal India Ltd (CIL). This could be a turn-off for the coal miner before an imminent increase in domestic prices planned for April-May. Leaving this aside, there was hardly any impact of the Budget on other pure-play miners such as Sesa Goa, NMDC and MOIL.

As for the power utilities, there are perhaps some reasons to rejoice. The Budget permitted power companies to tap external commercial borrowings (ECB) – a welcome move. The FM, hence the government, also recognised that the power sector is under duress because of high prices of coal. Why not straightway provide cheaper domestic coal, then, instead of trying to make imports cheaper?

For CIL, the change in guard is a few days away. If there is no further twist in the tale, S Narsing Rao would step into the company headquarters in Kolkata in the first week of April. The industry is looking up for the quiet man from Singareni to deliver on the production front. Incidentally, production at SCCL jumped 40 percent during his tenure.

The ministry, meanwhile, is doing its best to adopt the carrot and stick approach for the captive blocks. Unfortunately, it can neither offer nor take away much, except for the not-so-attractive coal blocks. It will be interesting to see how the companies respond to the auction of around 50 blocks the MoC has identified for allocation. Talking about captive allocation, one cannot but be amused at the recent furore in Parliament over block allocations. The allegations that the government lost Rs 1,000,000 crore by allocating blocks free could have some merit. But the fact that these blocks produce 38 million tons (mt) after 15-20 years of allocation makes light of such accusations.

And still, not every hope is lost. This issue of Coal Insights brings out a report on the prospects of underground coal gasification (UCG) in India. UCG is a clean, efficient and eco-friendly way of using coal that is unmineable. Although there was not much success initially, the technology holds promise for the future.

Happy reading,

Warm RegardsRakesh DubeyChief Editor

COAL INSIGHTS 4 MArCH 2012

COnTEnTs

49 | TEChnologynew biochemical syngas cleaning mechanismInnovative offers solutions for biodesuphurization of H2S from syngas for coal gasification.

06 | CovEr SToryFuel for the FutureIndia’s baby steps into the segment of underground coal gasification hold promise for the future.

46 | SPECIAl FEATUrEOn the threshold of infinite energy? A new innovation shows the way to extract carbon from flue gas emitted by thermal power plants.

16 UCG only way to exploit India’s deep coal seams

18 Wrong site selection foiled India’s UCG efforts

24 Thermal coal import prices subdued in March

25 Spot coking coal prices ease in March 27 CIL may raise prices in April-May 30 Govt. may start auction of new blocks in

May 32 MoC may deallocate 58 blocks 38 Trans Damodar coal block starts

production 39 MoEF may revise norms for washed coal

used in TPPs 40 Union Budget a mixed bag for metals,

mining sectors 41 Budget proposes slew of steps for crisis-

hit power sector 42 Indian plants generate 70,988.48 MU in

Feb 44 Power utilities’ coal import target for FY13

raised to 70 mt 45 India’s Jan cement production up nearly

10.9% 51 JSPLOdishacoalgasificationunitbyJuly 52 RCF,CILJVtosetupcoalgasification

unit at Talcher 54 BKT plans 32% hike in production 59 Allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL

companies a national blunder? 63 Concern over India’s coal future 64 US coal consumption, production to

decline in 2012: EIA 66 NewcokingcoalminestobenefitIndian

market 68 UKminingequipmentmakersflockto

Indian shore 70 Dedicated Freight Corridor to be ready by

end of 2017 71 Indian Railways April-Feb commodity

freight revenue up 9.17% 72 Porttrafficdown0.74%y-o-yinApril-Feb 73 Power sector update 84 E-auction 85 Port data

Publisher’s Statement

Statement about ownership and other particulars about Coal Insights required to be published under Rule 8 of the Registration of Newspapers (Central) Rule, 1956.

FORM IV(See Rule 8)

1. Place of publication : Kolkata2. Periodicity of publication : Monthly3. Printer’s Name : CDC Printers Whether citizen of India : Yes4. Publisher’s Name : Rajarshi Chattopadhyay Whether citizen of India : Yes Address : Tata Centre, 43 Jawaharlal Nehru Road Kolkata 7000715. Editor’s Name : Rakesh Dubey Whether citizen of India : Yes Address : Tata Centre, 43 Jawaharlal Nehru Road Kolkata 7000716. Names and addresses of individuals : mjunction services ltd, who own the newspaper and partners Tata Centre, 43 Jawaharlal Nehru Road or shareholders holding more than Kolkata – 700071 one per cent of the total capital

I, Rajarshi Chattopadhyay, hereby declare that the particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Sd/- Rajarshi ChattopadhyayDated: March 2012 Publisher


COvER sTORy

India’s quest for UCG

Fuel for the futureArindam Bandyopadhyay

India’s quest for UCG

Fuel for the futureArindam Bandyopadhyay


COvER sTORy

There’s an interesting anecdote about the first discovery of crude oil in India, at Digboi in Assam, way back in the late nineteenth century.

In 1867, a large number of ‘natives’ were camping in the forests of north-eastern tip of Assam to lay railway tracks for Assam Railway and Trading Co. Ltd. Except for a tiny habitat nearby, the area was marked as having virgin forest cover. One day, the loggers who deployed elephants for hauling found stains of a sticky brown fluid on the feet and tail of the pachyderm. As they followed the footprints of the animal, legend has it, the natives discovered a bubbling liquid oozing out of the forest floor ponging a heavy odour. Some propounded that the area was not suitable for human habitation; “Look into the ground, it doesn’t even hold water.” Some went a step ahead and fancied the land was actually cursed. It was not until the Canadian engineer overseeing the project caught sight of the seepage that the crude was identified and a historic discovery made!

This may be partly true, partly a legend. But such initial doubts and suspicion are a little too common in case of many new discoveries and technology applications in this country. Be it nuclear power, information technology or economic liberalisation, they have always come with a tag of fear and apprehension, even though they were tried and tested elsewhere. Underground coal gasification (UCG) could be the latest addition to that list.

In common parlance, UCG is an industrial in-situ gasification process, which is carried out in non-mined coal seams using injection of oxidants, and bringing the product gas to surface through production wells drilled from the surface. The product gas could be used as a chemical feedstock or as fuel for power generation.

At a time when India is facing stagnation in coal production, hampering its power sector growth, coal gasification comes as a viable alternative source of fuel. To go by the experts, only a third

of India’s proven coal reserves is mineable. Coal gasification technology can help extract the gas tapped in such deposits. By converting its coal reserves into enough gas and oil, India can surmount chronic power shortages and halve its energy import bill of $110 billion a year. Also, UCG has numerous other usages for chemicals and fertiliser industries and, according to industry sources, could “ensure future sustainability”.

Unfortunately, the country has been a rather late entrant into the field. While the technology is decades old, India’s first commercial coal gasification plant is just about to start production. In terms of usage of UCG, India lags far behind China and also some other neighbours. Worse, the country as a whole seems still not convinced.

UCG and its meritsIn simple words, UCG technology converts coal into a combustible gas underground. The in-situ gasification produces syngas, which is a mixture of carbon-monoxide, hydrogen and carbon-dioxide. It has a lesser energy density than natural gas and is used as a fuel source or feedstock for the production of other chemicals.

The use of UCG is as old as 150 years or more. The world, especially Europe and the US, widely used this “spirit of the coal” for street lighting, set up gas plants, discovered the chemical composition and refined the technology. Over the years, a wide variety of appliances and uses for gas was developed.

As of today, the coal gas has a number of by-products that are useful for the industry. These include coal tar, sulphur and ammonia. Dyes, medicines, including sulfa drugs, saccharine and many organic compounds are derived from coal gas. Coal tar is subjected to fractional distillation to recover various products including tar (used in roads), phenol (used in the manufacture of plastics), cresols (disinfectants), creosote (wood preservative) and benzole (motor fuel).

♦ Coal tar is a thick black liquid with high viscosity. It can be used for roofing jobs; Coal tar is sometimes used for heating or to fire boilers. It also has medical uses.

♦ Benzole is obtained from coal tar or coal gas. It is sometimes mixed with petrol and is sold as a motor fuel.

♦ Creosote is obtained from high temperature distillation of coal tar, and is used as a fungicide, insecticide, miticide, and

sporicide to protect wood and is applied by pressure methods to wood products.

♦ Phenol is used to make chemical intermediates for a wide range of applications, ranging from plastics to pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemicals.

♦ Cresol is usually derived from coal tar and wood tar and is used primarily as a disinfectant. It also has uses in fermentation and molecular biology.

By-products of coal gas manufacture

Corporate Office:

Volvo India Pvt. Ltd. Volvo Construction Equipment #65/1, Parin Building, Bagmane Tech Park, C V Raman Nagar, Bangalore 560 093 Tel: +91 80 6691 2000 Fax: +91 80 6691 2287 www.volvoce.com

DIG DOWN, AND YOU’LL FINDIT’S A VOLVO TO THE CORE.

volvo construction equipment

Authorized Dealers

Infra Equip Pvt. Ltd., DhanbadTel: +91 6540 262575 Email: [email protected]

Pollutech Engineering, Bhubaneshwar Tel: +91 674 258 5477 Email: [email protected]

Suchita Earthmoving Solutions, Guwahati Tel: +91 99540 89208 Email: [email protected]

Suchita Millenium Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata Tel +91 33 2219 7951 Email: [email protected]

Volvo builds better excavators, loaders and articulated haulers and we are also one of the world’s largest engine makers. Engines built to work harder, for longer. To need less maintenance. To deliver more power at lower rpm. So if you’re using a Volvo excavator, for example, you don’t have to slow down as you dig down. With a Volvo under the hood, you know you’ve got your hands on higher productivity, lower costs - and more profit.


Sulphur is used in the manufacture of sulphuric acid and ammonia is used in the manufacture of fertilisers. In fact, coal gasification is a route for a viable urea-ammonia plant. It is also an alternative source of fuel for DRI plants and thus can be used in the secondary steelmaking process.

The major benefit of the UCG technology, as already mentioned, is that it can be applied to mining resources that are otherwise not economical to extract. Improved UCG technology could increase the amount of exploitable reserves as it helps to gasify deep, thin and low-grade coal seams. Not only in India, this process could greatly help other coal producing countries to exploit maximum their coal reserves. “UCG could increase recoverable coal reserves in the US by as much as 300 to 400 percent,” said Julio Friedman, who led the Carbon Management Program of Livermore National Laboratory, US.

To go by an analyst’s estimate, the syngas produced by UCG contains about 80 percent of the energy in the coal, while another 15 percent of the useful energy can be recovered as steam. “Thus when used in combined cycle mode, the energy losses during the gasification process are only about 5 percent.” According to some other estimate, about 350 cubic metres of gas can be produced per ton of coal. The by-products of significant commercial value are hydrocarbons, phenols, ammonia and clean water.

UCG also offers an alternative to conventional coal mining methods. The environmental impact of UCG is less than that of traditional coal mining, experts said.

Rediscovering the wheelIn India, UCG was never tried on a significant scale. But globally, the technology saw its ups and downs over the last 150 years. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century,

the world used coal gas to good measure for street lighting, but discarded it following the advent of electric power.

Another reason for the withdrawal of the technology was its growing reputation as “ugly duckling”, especially in the US. The hydrogen gas that is yielded by the process was then considered as an environmental hazard.

It is interesting to note that the same technology made a comeback decades later, in the late 20th century, as an environmentally sustainable process of ensuring energy security. Much of the world had, meanwhile, changed its outlook on crude oil, given the depleting reserves and volatile prices. Oil price spike was seen as an event that would become more frequent by the day. Many countries without significant crude reserves started looking for ways to replace imported oil with secure domestic energy sources, primarily coal. Hydrogen fuel gained prominence as a prospective clean energy source. And the world started rediscovering the potential of UCG.

During the oil crisis of the 1970s, the US Department of Energy (DoE) took it up on itself to invest heavily in alternative energy sources, including coal gasification technologies. More than 30 UCG pilot tests were run across the country. Two sites in Centralia (Washington) and Hoe Creek (Wyoming) were developed by Livermore Laboratory, which pioneered in the study of UCG.

Along with the US, the former USSR made substantial investment in the technology over the decades and achieved commercial success too. But it is China which has taken the lead in UCG of late. The country started investing in UCG since the 1980s and currently boasts of the largest operating UCG programme.

With the Middle East crisis flaring up from time to time, and uncertainty looming over supply of crude and natural gas from conflict regions, more and more countries are focusing on this technology. Overall, there are an increasing number of UCG projects emerging around the world including Australia, UK, Canada, China, USA, India, Vietnam, Pakistan, Hungary, Chile and South Africa.

COvER sTORy

Advantages of UCG ♦ Tapping energy from vast coal reserves which are not

commercially viable to mine ♦ Back of the envelope calculations indicate huge energy

potential of about 1,000 MW power generation from a small block of 25 sq. km, having 10 m thick coal seam

♦ Increases worker safety as no mining operations involved

♦ Low environmental impact• No atmospheric pollution; coal mines involves

coal dust pollution• No appreciable change in landscape • Less subsidence than conventional mining• Less Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) issues• No surface disposal of ash and coal tailings• Potential GHG reduction activity (CO2

sequestration in cavity)

Linc Energy’s UCG plant at Chinchilla, Australia


COvER sTORy

The UCG processThe UCG process has improved over the years. Earlier, the old coal gasification processes were carried out in the absence of air, partially converting the coal to town gas with a large residue of coke. Modern processes convert all the carbon to a mixture of CO and hydrogen, commonly called syngas.

There are three general types of coal gasifiers, namely fixed bed, entrained flow and fluidised bed. All these technologies are based on partial oxidation or gasification of a carbonaceous feed material.

The partial oxidation reaction produces syngas containing CO, H2 and CO2. It also contains H2O, CH4, H2S, NH3 and particulates. In case a fixed bed gasification technology is used, the syngas will also contain some organic compounds. There are various technologies for coal gasification, but essentially all of them employ the same chemical processes.

Gasification technologies may vary in the way the blowing is supplied. In case of ‘direct blowing’, the coal and oxidizer are supplied towards each other from the opposite sides of the reactor channel.

In contrast, in ‘reversed blowing’, the coal and the oxidizer are supplied from the same side of the reactor. In this case, there is no chemical interaction between coal and oxidizer before the reaction zone.

In the power sector, the Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plants use a combined-cycle design

(incorporating both gas and steam turbines) to maximise the benefits of coal gasification. The gas turbine is driven by the combustion of syngas, while the by-product steam is used to heat exchange with water/steam to generate superheated steam to drive the steam turbine.

Current status of UCGAs mentioned above, China is leading the field in terms of the number of operating UCG programmes. Currently, there are more than 12 trials are bring conducted in closed underground mines in the country.

Elsewhere, the major commercially operated projects of UCG include Angren in Uzbekistan, Chinchilla in West Brisbane, Australia and Majuba in South Africa. In the last 10-15 years, a number of European countries including Netherlands, Spain, Germany and Italy have commissioned demonstration projects for coal gasification.

In India, the effort to set up coal based industries dates back to the 1940s. However, the early efforts of UCG did not taste much success.

Along with technology issues, the pricing of natural gas affected UCG projects. The commercial success of UCG was doubted by the coal miners as well as the industry.

The situation started changing for the better in the last few years. The stagnated supply of coal and limited supply of natural gas in India prompted the project planners to opt for this technology.

As of today, the first commercially operated UCG projects in India are just about to commence, thanks to the pioneering ventures of JSPL and Reliance. JSPL is going to commence its Angul plant in Odisha shortly. The Angul project would

UCG salient features• Under the process of UCG, gasification of coal happens

insitu by controlled burning• About 350 m3gas can be produced per tonne of coal• By-products of significant commercial value will be

hydrocarbons, phenols, anhydrous NH3and clean water

• UCG overcomes hazards of underground and open cast mining operations.

• In UCG process, ash/ slug removal is not required as they remain in the cavities

• Cost of production for this energy resource could be as low as US$ 1.0-1.5 per mmbtu

UCG process diagram

Coal resources insitu

CO2 removalCO shift and Methanation

100% CO, H2, CH4, CO2200-300 BTU/SCF

Steam/Oxygen InjectionAir Injection

50% Nitrogen50% CO, H2, CH4, CO2

100-180 BTU/SCF

Electrical power genration & Industrial fuel

100-180 BTU/SCF Synthesis Gas(Chemical feedstock)

300-400 BTU/SCF

Synthetic Pipeline Gas900-1000 BTU/SCF


COvER sTORy

combine the Lurgi coal gasification technology with a Midrex plant to use coal gas for producing DRI. JSPL has plans to set up similar such projects in future, company sources said.

Reliance, on its part, is going to use pet coke for its upcoming coal gasification project. Another Indian company, Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertiliser (RCF) has planned to take up an UCG project at Talcher, Odisha based on Lurgi fixed bed technology. As for the technology, Indian PSU BHEL has

developed a technology for fluid-based gasification process for high-ash coal.

Fuel for the futureIn a country like India, UCG can open up new avenues of energy security for fuel-hungry economy.

For India, the stagnated coal production, huge unmineable deposits of non-coking coal, limited availability of natural gas and bulging oil import bills are reason enough to give a serious look into this technology, which some analysts tag as the fuel for the future.

“Coal gasification is a very important technology from many perspectives – fuel, emissions and efficiency,” said an analyst. “It is a perfect technology, once completely developed and commercialised, to hedge against the uncertain

availability and price of natural gas. The coal is likely to become a very attractive fuel for the hydrogen production and could emerge as a critical bridge towards hydrogen economy in the coming years,” he said.

Except for the threat to ground water contamination, UCG is much more environment-friendly when compared with conventional mining methods.

In fact, coal gasification offers one of the most versatile and clean ways to covert coal into electricity, hydrogen and other valuable energy products. A number of coal gasification electric power plants are currently operating commercially in the US and other countries. Many experts believe UCG will be “at the heart of future generations of clean coal technology plants”.

UCG can achieve extremely low SOx, NOx and particulate emissions from burning coal-derived gases. In an IGCC, the syngas produced is virtually free of fuel-bound nitrogen. If oxygen is used in a coal gasifier instead of air, carbon dioxide is emitted as a concentrated gas stream in syngas at high pressure. In this form, it can be captured and sequestrated more easily and at lower costs.

In terms of efficiency too, UCG scores over typical coal combustion based power plants, where heat from burning coal is used to boil water, making steam that converts only a third of the energy value of coal into electricity.

The India Inc. is slowly looking up to these prospects of a new form of fuel. Although the government remains tardy as ever, the corporate sector – both public and private – are slowly shedding their slackness to peep into the future of the fuel, or perhaps the fuel for the future!

Major market drivers According to a report by Frost & Sullivan, the high price of natural gas is the major driver for the development of this technology. “It is believed that as long as the natural gas prices exceed $4 per mmbtu, the technology could compete with the natural gas based generation technologies. Also, given the abundant supply of coal, the prices of coal would be much more stable as compared to natural gas.”

The high efficiency potential coupled with the low level of emissions from the IGCC systems has also attracted the interest of various companies. “Their efficiency is above 40 percent. Furthermore, these systems produce little solid waste and close to zero SOx and NOx emissions. Around 99 percent of the sulphur present in the coal can be recovered and sold. The carbon monoxide produced can be reacted with steam to produce hydrogen and carbon dioxide and after “sequestrating” the carbon dioxide, the remaining hydrogen can be used in a fuel cell,” the report said.

Gasification technologies


COvER sTORy

Underground coal gasification (UCG) could be an alternative source of fuel for some countries, but for India it is perhaps the only way to exploit the country’s

huge deposit of coal that lies below mineable depths. To go by a study by the Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research (CIMFR), the coal deposits lying below the mineable depth of 600 mtrs may be nearly as voluminous as the deposits lying above the mineable depth.

“In India, the mineable depth is 600 metres. But there are vast resources below the mineable depth,” said a leading scientist of CIMFR. While the Geological Survey of India (GSI) estimates 285 billion (bn) tons of coal reserves in the country up to a depth of 1,200 metres, total reserves could be as much as 475 bn tons.

“Altogether, there are 285 bn tons of coal reserves up to 1,200 metres of depth. There is another 60 bn tons of reserves in another basin below 1,500 metres. There is also substantial coal in Bengal basin below 2-3 km depth. Overall, India is estimated to have 475 bn tons of coal reserves, of which only 100 bn tons is recoverable by conventional method mining,” he said. This coal lying below mineable depth can only be used via underground coal gasification.

UCG is the partial combustion of coal below to produce a combustible gas known as syn-gas for use as an energy source. It is achieved by drilling two wells from the surface, one to supply air/oxygen, another well to produce syn-gas to the

surface. Apart from syn-gas, by-products are hydrocarbon liquids, ammonia, among others, sources in CIMFR informed.

Hot prospectsIn India, Chinakuri coal mine of Eastern Coalfields Ltd (ECL) is known as the deepest mine, located at a depth 1,400 metres. There are deeper levels at North and South Karanpura and Raniganj as well.

There is also huge gas potential at Jharia coalfield, where the deposit below 600 metres depth is not really explored. According to some estimate, the reserves up to 600 metres is 14.2 bn tons while the deposit in the range 600-1,200 metres is 5.2 bn tons. Altogether, 19.4 bn tons of reserves are estimated up to the depth of 1,200 metres.

“All these deeper levels are of interest to us as gas can be extracted from these levels,” the scientist said.

To explore the potential of UCG in India, CIMFR has entered into an MoU with University of California for a trial of UCG. This, however, requires substantial funds and institutes like CIMFR are looking forward to the MoC to grant funds for UCG trials in the Twelfth Plan budget.

Sources said initially there was a conflict between MoC and Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas over the ownership of gas obtained from deep coal seams. While the MoC maintained that the gas coming off coal is its property, the petroleum ministry claimed it should have the ownership of any gas containing hydrocarbon. An amicable solution was arrived at later on whereby the gas available up to mineable depth will belong to MoC, and the rest to the petroleum ministry. The mineable area, as already mentioned, is 600 metres below ground level.

UCG only way to exploit India’sdeep coal seams

Coal Insights Bureau

UCG efforts in India

Mehasana in Gujarat in 1980s;Merta road in Rajasthan in late 1980s;Bihar (now Jharkhand) in late 1980s;Gas Authority of India in Rajasthan since 1998;Neyveli Lignite Corporation since 2002.

Open pit mine Bingham Canyon copper mine in Utah, USA. At 4 km wide and 1.2 km deep, it is the world’s deepest open-pit mine. It began operations in 1906.


COvER sTORy

Notwithstanding its rich coal reserves, India is yet to achieve commercial success in the field of underground coal gasification (UCG). In fact, the

country is lagging even behind its neighbouring countries in this respect. While there are various reasons cited for this failure – technological and economic – a consensus view is that the project planners failed to make proper site selection.

In a vastly populated country like India, this was all the more important given the environmental implications of this kind of projects. One of the major concerns for UCG projects is the risk of ground water contamination. Before taking further steps to tap this resource, the country therefore needs to mind this important step so as not to repeat the mistakes.

“All sites are not suitable for UCG. In case of pilots which failed in the past, wrong site selection was the dominant reason,” said A.K. Shrivastava, group director, Abhijeet Group.

“Experience shows that proper site selection, based on detailed site characterisation, plays a very important role in the success of UCG. Detailed investigations enhance the chances of success. But detailed investigations cost a lot of

money. Therefore a suitable primary screening criteria is needed,” he said.

Echoing his views, Dr P.B. Rastogi, director, Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), said UCG projects often lead to groundwater contamination, not only in India but in sparsely populated countries as well. For instance, he said the Chinchilla coal gasification pilot project in Australia had tried to limit outflow of contaminants by maintaining negative pressure inside the coal combustion chamber, but the attempt was rather unsuccessful.

“This is a problem that perhaps cannot be solved….there is no site in India where there is no ground water or water that will not be consumed,” said Rastogi.

Shrivastava, however, said that risks can be mitigated through proper site selection. For this, a selection criterion needs to be chalked out, taking inputs from other countries and giving due importance to problems specific to the Indian perspective.

Selection criterionShrivastava laid down a number of surface features that may affect UCG projects. These may include distance from human habitat, distance from water sources, nature of deposit,

resource base, geology of the deposit, hydrology of the deposit area, distance from working or abandoned mines, and nature and position of the aquifers.

One of the site characterisation objectives is to reduce risk of UCG to acceptable levels. For this, the project planner needs to use proper assessment tools for selection and screening.

Also, plan operations and facilities are to be based on site-specific risk profiles. The planners need to evolve and set operations guidelines based on verified site parameters. He also needs to identify the operating ranges that limit production of syn-gas, contaminant compounds, prevent contaminant migration out of the cavity during and post UCG. Economics appropriate to UCG site

Wrong site selection foiledIndia’s UCG efforts



COvER sTORy

and appropriate technology for well linking are also crucial, he said.

Factors that affect UCG design

Coal seam geologyThickness, dip and depthPermeability to gas and liquid

Properties of coalRank (Ash, VM, Carbon content)Chemical composition (H2 & S)

Strata & over burden propertiesGeology, hydrologyGeo-mechanics & drilling Properties

Operating conditionsOperating Pressure, well layoutInjectioncomposition&flowrates

Process&efficiencyThermal, chemicalResource recovery

Product gas Volume,flowrate,compositionCalorificvalue,temperature

Impact on environment Thermal, chemical, subsidence

Selection factors The various selection factors would affect the projects undertaken in a number of ways. These could be summarised under the following heads:

Depth of coal seam: Shallow seams are not suitable for UCG due to high gas losses, potential for connection to surface and possible contamination of ground water. Deeper seams allow higher operating pressure due to higher hydrostatic pressure which enhances the methane content and thus heating value of the gas. Deeper seams require guided drilling resulting in higher cost. Deeper seams are less likely to be linked with potable aquifers thus avoiding water contamination. The syn-gas pressure may be adequate for direct use in turbines resulting in saving on cost of compression. Also, deeper seams minimise risk of subsidence.

UCG trials – date, depth, thickness

location Coal type Thickness (m)

Depth (m) year

Lisichanskaya Bituminous 0.44-2 60-250 1948-65Yuzhno-Abinskaya Bituminous 2.2-9 50-300 1999-currentAngrensikaya Lignite 2-22 120-250 1957-currentPodmoskovnaya Lignite 2.5 30-80 1946-53Shatskaya Lignite 2.6-4 30-60 1956-63Sinelnikovsy Lignite 3.6-6 80 -Chinchilla (Australia) - 8-10 130 1999-2004

Tremeda (Spain) Sub-bituminous, lignite 2-5 530-580 1989-98

France Anthracite - 1200 1981-86Belgium Anthracite - 860 1979-87Newman Spinney (UK) Sub-bituminous 0.75 75 1959USA (Hanna 2) Sub-bituminous 6.8 90-120 1973-74USA (Hoe Creek) Sub-bituminous 7.6 38 1976-79

Porosity & permeability: Higher permeability makes it easy to link injection and production wells. It increases the rate of gasification by making transport of reactants easier.

US selection criteria ♦ Seam thickness greater than one meter or 0.6 m for

steeply dipping seams ♦ Avoid variable thickness seams ♦ Avoid seams with overlying coal within 15m that is

thicker than 0.6 m ♦ Minimum Resource of 3.5 million tons ♦ Minimum over burden of 100 m ♦ Minimum distance of 1.6 km from populated area

(>100 people) ♦ Minimum distance of 0.8 Km mtrs from major faults ♦ Minimum distance of 1.6 Km from oil & Gas

recovery development ♦ Minimum distance of 0.4 Km from major highways

and rail ♦ Minimum distance of 1.6 Km from rivers and lakes ♦ Minimum distance of 3.2 Km from active mines ♦ Minimum distance of 1.6 Km from abandoned

mines ♦ Steeply dipping seams preferred ♦ Floor & roof conditions need closer examination

Australian site selection criteria ♦ Seam thickness more than 5 m ♦ Coal Ash less than 40% (ADB) ♦ Seam dip less than 200 ♦ Seam depth 200-400 m ♦ Minimum faulting – no dip/sills ♦ Roof thermally stable with minimal permeability.

Preferably structured to encourage even caving ♦ Hydraulic gradient >200 m ♦ Adjacent aquifers may contain poor quality water

and are of minimal permeability

Other notes ♦ Limited Human activity ♦ No waterways over lying the site ♦ Subsidence acceptable at the location ♦ Coal resource suitable for long time operation


COvER sTORy

Higher porosity and permeability also increases the influx of water. Higher porosity increases product gas losses.

Coal seam thickness & dip: Thicker seams contain more resources for the same area; hence need fewer wells. In such cases, the drilling costs are lower. In thicker seams it is difficult to inter link injection and production wells due to drill head deviation problems. In thin seams, on the contrary, the heat losses are more and this leads to

lower thermal efficiency and lower product gas quality. It is difficult to gasify seams less than 2 m in thickness. UCG is easier to sustain in dipping seams as tars and fluids fly away from the gasification zone.

Rank, ash, VM & carbon content: The rank of coal plays an important part. Lignite

and sub-bituminous coals are easier to gasify. Swelling properties of bituminous coals obstruct the gas passage and can increase gas losses; hence generally not preferred for UCG. Higher ash content means lower calorific value of the in-situ material; hence lower calorific value of gas. The gasification characteristics of coal play an important role on the volume and quality of the syn-gas.

Process selection: UCG requires use of coupled process. Hydrological, geochemical and geo-mechanical models to capture:

♦ balancing gasifier operational pressure against hydrologic pressure and other gradients in the field to prevent outward contaminant migration;

♦ impact of gasifier operating conditions on creation and behavior of contaminants within the burn Chamber;

♦ enhanced vertical hydraulic conductivity of the rock matrix above the burn chamber as a result of collapse and fracturing; and

♦ buoyancy-driven upward flow of groundwater in the vicinity of the burn chamber toward potable water resources at shallower depth.

Selection criteria in other countriesShrivastava said the other major coal producing countries which have pursued UCG have built their own criteria depending on the local geology and environment conditions. Among these countries, US, UK and Australia have well laid down selection criteria for UCG projects. The various parameters accounted for by these countries include seam thickness, nature of seams, minimum resource base, minimum over burden, minimum distance from populated area, hydraulic gradient, permeability of adjacent aquifers, among others.

While there are some features common with these countries, the Indian coal has some peculiarities that are to be considered while laying down such a list of criteria for Indian conditions.

“The Indian coals are mostly Permian Gondwana coals. Tertiary coals are found mostly in the North East. Gondwana coals are found along distinct river valleys, viz Damodar-Koel, Son-Mahanadi, Pranhita-Godawari, Wardha , Pench- Kanhan

Valley. Indian coal has high ash content, low sulphur content, high ash fusion temperature, refractory nature of ash, low iron content in ash, low chlorine content, and low toxic trace elements,” said Shrivastava.

Considering these features of Indian coal, the following selection criteria may be considered for Indian UCG projects:

♦ Seam thickness more than 1 m. For banded seams, coal thickness excluding bands > 1m

♦Minimum resource of 5 million tons ♦Minimum depth > 300 ♦Inter seam parting > 30 m for

overlying seam thickness >0.5 m ♦Should be at a distance of 3Km from

nearest habitat (population >100) ♦Minimum distance of 1.5 km from

rivers, lakes, reservoirs ♦Minimum distance of 3.0 km from

working mines ♦Minimum distance of 1.5 km from

abandoned mines ♦Area free of excessive faulting ♦Preferably overlying sealing layer of

clay ♦No over lying waterways, highways,

Railways ♦Thermally stable roof for even

caving


COAL mARkET funDAmEnTALs

The Indian thermal coal market remained subdued despite some enquiries that took place in March, according to market participants. Both consumers and

traders are not bullish or ready to take a position in this market mainly because of financial problems.

The power prices remained low, while coal prices were high, with the local currency, the Rupee, hovering around 50-51 to the US dollar, acting as a deterrent to imports.

Australian thermal coal of heating value of 6,300 kcal GAR is currently being offered at around $106 per ton against $114 per ton quoted at the beginning of March. Offers of South African thermal coal of heating value of 6,000 kcal NAR fell by $2 per ton to $103 per ton in March from February end levels. Offers for Indonesian coal of heating value of 5,900 kcal GAR is hovering around $92 per ton, while that of heating value of 5,000 kcal GAR is at $72 per ton.

Traders said deals are done only if the coal is required on an urgent basis. No one is buying to stock the coal, and small power projects are also buying low grade coal with high ash.

Another reason for the lack of buying interest is that players

are busy closing their financial year which ends on March 31 and preparing their budget allocation for 2012-13.

Indian buyers are quoting prices way below market rates, citing bids of around $100 per ton fob, for prompt Richards Bay cargoes against offers of around $105 per ton.

However, according to analysts, thermal coal prices will remain at relatively high levels over the long term despite aggressive mine expansions to meet the growth in Asian demand, particularly from China and India.

Analysts at a recent coal conference felt although there will be “aggressive” thermal coal supply expansions, steam coal prices in the long term will defy expectations of a drop and will instead remain at high levels.

There may be short-term seasonal fluctuations such as the drop in prices in the current quarter, but the Newcastle reference coal price for Australian coal will increase progressively, analysts said. Cost pressures, infrastructure bottlenecks and a decrease in export coal quality will combine to hold prices at traditionally high levels and China and India will be the top two demand drivers. India’s seaborne steam coal demand by

2030 will be 400 million tons (mt) per year from 80 mt in 2011, overtaking Japan, according to analysts.

India’s thermal coal demand may be even higher if domestic coal supply is constrained by delays in associated rail and port infrastructure projects. Cost pressures from changing fiscal regimes such as the carbon tax in Australia and the minimum export price regulations in Indonesia will also support high thermal coal prices.

Thermal coal import prices subdued in March Coal Insights Bureau

Thermol coal price trend in March 2012

Date

South African

Coal (6000 Kcal nAr)

Australian Thermal

coal (6300 gAr)

Indonesian (5900 Kcal

gAr)

Indonesian (5000 Kcal/

gAr)

Freight from SA to West Coast

From Indonesian

to West Coast

From SA to East

Coast

From Indonesia

to East Coast

2-Mar 103.5 113.1 95 73.4 18.7 10.7 20.9 10.25-Mar 103.75 111 94.75 73 19.3 10.6 21.8 10.26-Mar 103.5 109 94.25 73 19.3 10.6 21.8 10.212-Mar 103.25 105 92.8 72.2 19.5 10.75 22 10.215-Mar 103 105.8 91.75 71.8 19.5 10.75 22 10.2

As many as 18 power plants in the country are faced with critical level of coal shortage, according to minister of State for Power, K.C. Venugopal.

Of the 89 thermal power projects being monitored, 34 had fuel (coal) stock less than seven days and 25 had less than four days stock, he said, while speaking in the Rajya Sabha (the upper house of Parliament).

“None of the power utilities in the country has reported that any of their thermal power stations are stuck for want of coal, although inadequate availability of coal vis-a-vis requirement has affected electricity generation in some of the power plants,” he said.

Power utilities, he said, have reported a generation loss of 8.7 billion units in 2011-12 (up to February, 2012) due to shortage of coal. Listing steps being taken by the government

to mitigate shortage of coal for thermal power plants in the country, he said Coal India is being asked to enhance coal production while power utilities have been advised to import coal to bridge the domestic supply deficit.

As many as 11 plants of state-owned NTPC lost 7.8 billion units because of shortage of coal during the current fiscal. Other utilities that lost on generation of electricity included ones in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh, he added.

The budget announced cuts in import duties on coal. The basic customs duty on steam coal was cut to zero from 5 percent with countervailing duty reduced to 1 percent from 5 percent for fiscal 2012-13 or 2013-14. Analysts say that the effective reduction in import coal cost is close to 9 percent.

Critical coal crisis in 18 power unitsCoal Insights Bureau


Spot coking coal prices from Australia eased by about 1 percent in March 2012 when compared with February 2012 owing to lack of buying support from India and

China. However, the fall was restricted to some extent towards

the end of March owing to heavy rainfall and significant disruption at several coking coal mines in the Moranbah region of the Bowen Basin, in Australia’s Queensland.

Premium Low Vol prices slid to $209 per ton fob Australia in March against $211 per ton at the end of February. HCC 64 Mid Vol, however, also fell by $8 per ton to $189 per ton fob in one month’s time. The semi soft variety slid by $4 per ton to $139 per ton in one month’s time.

There was talk that a number of mines in the region were being impacted, including high-quality coking coal and PCI mines owned by BHP Billiton-Mitsubishi Alliance, Anglo American, Peabody and Rio Tinto.

Haulage was being affected by wet mining pits and ramps, and mines may have to close due to access being cut off for the next work shift to get to site, according to reports.

The rainfall comes at a crucial time in coking coal contract negotiations for April-June 2012, between miner Anglo American and large steelmakers in South Korea and Japan.

The Goonyella rail system in Queensland, a key

Spot coking coal prices easeCoal Insights Bureau




transportation link for Bowen Basin coking coal mines was shut on March 20 after heavy rainfall caused flooding on a section of the track, operator QR National said. According to reports, the world’s largest coking coal export port Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal was also closed. The likely duration of the rail closure was unclear.

The Goonyella system links 30 mines to DBCT and Hay

Point Coal Terminal. However, operations west of Coppabella remained open, and the Newlands and Blackwater systems also remained open.

Separately, Peak Downs Highway, the main artery for shipping fuel and other supplies to the Bowen Basin coal mines, has also been cut off by the rain, according to reports.

The low demand from India was attributed to a scarcity of iron ore facing the steel sector. The Indian steel plants are still reeling under a shortage of iron ore and have reduced its coal consumption substantially. In 2010-11, domestic steelmakers imported close to 27 mt of the raw material.

Met coke import prices rise in March

Met coke import prices rose in March on some rebound in demand from steel mills and supply constraints of coking coal following

the bad weather in Queensland region of Australia. The import prices of met coke were hovering

around $385 per ton currently, up from $372 per ton at the end of February.

LAM coke demand, which is currently at 33 million tons per annum (mtpa) domestically, is expected to shoot up to 58 mtpa in the next five years, as steel makers increase capacity, according to industry estimates.

Coking coal & Met coke price trend in March 2012

Date

HCC Peak Down fob Australia

($ per ton)

Premium hard coking coal prices (premium low vol)

fob Australia ($ per ton)

HCC 64 Mid Vol fob Australia ($

per ton)

Low Vol PCI fob

Australia ($ per ton)

Semi soft coking coal rates fob

Australia ($ per ton)

Met coke price cfr India (($ per ton)

02-Mar 211 211.5 187 149.5 138.5 370

05-Mar 210 210 186 148.5 137.5 367

06-Mar 209 209.5 186 148.5 136.5 366

12-Mar 208 208.5 187 145 134 385

15-Mar 209 209.5 187 145.5 136 385

An agreement has been reached after price negotiations with regard to hard coking coal and LV PCI coal for blast furnace for the first quarter

(April to June) of FY2012.Out of the above, the first quarter contract price of high-

grade hard coking coal of Queensland, Australian and Canadian origins is around $205-210 per ton fob, nearly 11 percent less from the previous term (January to March). On the other hand, the first quarter contract price of LV PCI coal of Queensland and Canadian origins is around $153.30 per ton fob, 10.4 percent less from the previous term.

As a result of these, the prices of both hard coking coal and LV PCI coal have been reduced in four consecutive terms since second quarter (July to September) of FY2011. Incidentally, the contract prices of high-grade hard coking coal and LV PCI coal for first quarter of FY2011 were $330 per per ton fob and $275 per ton fob respectively.

The prices have been reduced because of the worldwide dwindling demand on the steel products attributed to the economic crisis in the European Union.

The contract price for the fourth quarter of 2011-

12 (January to March in 2012) was $230-235 per ton fob Australia. Therefore, it becomes a price reduction by around $25 (nearly 11 percent) from the one for the previous term.

The contract for third quarter (October-December) was signed at around $285 a ton, but since then the spot prices had dipped sharply on low demand from European, US and Chinese steel makers. The contract for second quarter (July-September) was signed at $315 a ton compared with $330 for the first quarter (April-June) of 2011-12.

Coking coal prices, which was earlier fixed on yearly basis, was around $97 per ton fob during 2007-08. The prices touched a higher of $300 per ton in 2008-09 before dropping to $129 per ton in 2009-10.

However, prices started rising again from 2010-11 and the miners started quarterly contract from Q1 of 2010-11 and touched a high of $225 per ton for the fourth quarter of the year.

Prices peaked to $330 per ton in the first quarter of 2011-12 owing to floods in the Queensland region of Australia, but gradually fell to current levels as supply became normal over time.

Price fixed for Q1Coal Insights Bureau


fEATuRE

The proposed review of GCV-based pricing system by Coal India Ltd (CIL) is likely to be delayed by around a month and may take place in late April or early May

2012, coal secretary Alok Perti told Coal Insights.“The data will start coming in only from the middle or end

of April. We will analyse the data and then come to a decision (about a possible revision in prices),” Perti said.

Earlier, the coal ministry (MoC) had announced it would review the impact of the revised prices on CIL’s revenue after March. The review was proposed as CIL was compelled to partially withdraw a “substantial” hike in coal prices on January 31 due to large scale protest from consumers, especially the power sector. The problem started after CIL switched over to gross calorific value (GCV) based pricing from useful heat value (UHV) based pricing which led to a sharp increase in coal prices with effect from January 1, 2012.

Asked about the likely movement of prices post review, Perti said, “Whether prices will go up or come down cannot be said at this point. For that we have to analyse the data first.”

CIL acting chairperson Zohra Chatterji however indicated the industry may expect a price rise sometime in April. The industry on its part also expected an upward revision around that time.

The company was earlier forced to roll back an average 12.5 percent price rise under Gross Calorific Value (GCV)-based system, on January 31 following severe protests from domestic consumers led by the power industry. The miner had decided to do away with the system of pricing based on useful heat value (UHV) to align with global practices. Under the UHV system, the highest quality coal in A-grade – with heat value exceeding 6,200 Kcal/kg – was sold at `4,100 per ton. Under the GCV system, the highest band coal – with a calorific value exceeding 7,000 Kcal/kg – cost `4,900 per ton. After the roll-back, this price was brought down to `4,870 per ton.

Analysts foresee 12% riseCIL, which partly withdrew its coal price hike in February, may again go for another round of price increase during the first quarter of 2012-13, an analyst report by BNP Paribas said.

The report stated that CIL may increase its coal prices by around 12 percent by June 2012. However, “one industry participant believed that 1QFY13 price hike by CIL will be limited to 5-6 percent only (vs. our assumption of 12 percent),” the report said.

“There was also a clear consensus that CIL will be forced to reduce the supply of higher priced linkage coal to non-power customers and e-auction volumes to improve availability for power sector, thus negatively impacting ASPs and margins,” it added.

Hike needed to offset wage costThe roll-back in prices on January 31 had eroded CIL’s cushion against the `6,500-crore impact of wage hike for over 360,000 workers. Some estimates showed the new grading system would have given CIL an additional `6,250 crore annually.

CIL’s new wage pact signed on January 31 saw an 88 percent increase in minimum basic of its employees to `15,712 per month, as against `8,360 per month during the previous deal. The other important highlights of the agreement were a special allowance of 4 percent of revised basic; and HRA of 2 percent of the basic pay for those who have not been provided with residential accommodation in other than urban area. Post retirement, medicare scheme for retired non-executives and

CIL may raise prices in April-MayCoal Insights Bureau

Zohra Chatterji, Chairperson, Coal India Limited


fEATuRE

The new and effective prices of CIL following revision

S no

gCv Bands

(Kcal/kg)

new Price after revision on Jan 31,

2012 (For Power Sector) but effective

from Jan 1, 2012

new Price after revision on Jan 31,

2012 (for non-power sectors), but effective from Jan

1, 2012

Indicative grades (as per previous classification)

Price/range as on Feb 27, 2011 (Power Sector) as per grades and mine

to mine

Price/range as on Feb 27,2011 for non-power sectors as per grades (mine to mine)

Change for Power Sector

Change for other Sectors

1 7000+ * *

A 3690 4100 730 to 1180 320 to 7702 6700-7000 4870 4870

3 6400-6700 4420 4420

4 6100-6400 3970 3970B 3590 3990 (-)790 to (+) 380 (-)20 to (-)1110

5 5800-6100 2800 2800

6 5500-5800 1450 1960 C 1050 to 1500 1300 to 1860 (-)50 to (+)450 100 to 660

7 5200-5500 1270 1720D 790 to 1240 1110 to 1560 30 to 480 430 to 610

8 4900-5200 1140 1540

9 4600-4900 880 1180E 730 to 1020 870 to 1080

50 to 150 and in some cases

(-) 240100 to 180

10 4300-4600 780 1050

11 4000-4300 640 870F 570 to 610 630 to 860 30 to 70 10 to 240

12 3700-4000 600 810

13 3400-3700 550 740G 350 to 700 440 to 650 150 to 200 90 to 300

14 3100-3400 500 680

15 2800-3100 460 620

Ungraded NA NA NA16 2500-2800 410 550

17 2200-2800 360 490

Note: * For GCV exceeding 7000 Kcal/kg, the price shall be increase by Rs 150/- per ton over and above the price applicable for GCV band exceeding 6700 but not exceeding 7000 Kcal/Kg, for increase in GCV by every 100 Kcal/kg or part thereof.For WCL, there shall be a 10% add on over and above the price mentioned above for GCV bands not exceeding 5800 Kcal/Kg and below.

All other elements of the ex-colliery delivered price as are presently applicable in terms of the last coal price notification circulated vide ref. no S & M: GM(F): Pricing: 1907 Dated 26.02.2011 will continue to remain applicable.For coal produced by the coal companies of CIL including NEC other than non-coking coal, the prices as are presently applicable in terms of the coal price notification circulated vide ref no. CIL: S&M: GM (F) Pricing 1907 dated 26.02.2011 will continue to remain applicable shown as under.


fEATuRE

their spouses was to be finalised within three months, ie. April 2012. Overall, the wage hike would result in around 60 percent increase in CIL’s wage bill (salary, wages and allowances), union sources said. They said that along with the increase in basic salary, the annual increment would also go up. In line with unions’ estimates, the company said that the wage hike would put an additional burden of ̀ 6,500 crore on the firm. As of March 2011, CIL’s total outgo on employees’ salary, wages and allowances was `11,715 crore.

“As per the NCWA VIII, which came into effect from July 1,

2006 workers got a raise of 24 percent in the wages, which had an impact of around `2,500 crore, so this was more than what they had expected,” R. Mohandas, director (personnel) of CIL had said. Initially, CIL had offered a hike of 10 percent when the talks started, while the workers unions were demanding a 50 percent hike.

Going forward, CIL may face another hike in labour cost as contract workers wages were expected to be settled in April. This, if implemented, would put additional burden on CIL and may call for a significant rise in prices to cover the same.


fEATuRE

The ministry of coal (MoC) is expected to

appoint a consultant for the auction of new blocks within the next couple of weeks and start the auction by May-June, coal secretary Alok Perti told Coal Insights.

A pre-selection meeting of MoC and interested consultants who had responded to the EoI floated by the ministry was held in

Delhi on March 12, he said. The ministry had floated the EoI to appoint a consultant who would come out with a transparent and efficient way of conducting the auction.

Asked when the auction process will start, Perti said,

“We would like to start it as soon as possible, but we have to examine the suggestions provided by the consultants.”

Overall, the entire process may take another two months to complete, he said, indicating that the auction may actually start in May-June.

MoC identifies 54 blocks The MoC has identified 54 coal blocks for allotment through government dispensation route and auction route to public and private sector companies. “In the first lot, 54 blocks will be put up for auction and allotment,” Perti said.

Govt may start auction of new blocks in MayCoal Insights Bureau

Alok Perti, Coal SecretaryVinod Rai, CAG


fEATuRE

However, it was not known how many of these blocks would be allotted through each route. “I don’t have the break-up of the numbers right now,” he said.

The ministry has been considering allotment of new blocks through auction route for quite sometime now, as the previous system of allotting blocks for captive mining was questioned from some quarters.

As of today, only 29 blocks of around 194 blocks allotted for captive production have come to the production stage. The ministry, on review of the development of the blocks, found a number of block owners lacking in action to achieve milestones. This prompted MoC to de-allocate some blocks and consider auctioning the new blocks so as to attract only the serious players.

Uproar over CAG report Meanwhile, a draft report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) on allocation of captive blocks by the government created a furore in Parliament on March 22, but was later watered down by the statutory authority as ‘preliminary observations’.

A media report which quoted the report titled ‘Performance Audit of Coal Block Allocations’ said the government extended undue benefits totalling Rs 10.67 lakh crore to commercial entities by giving them 155 coal acreages without auction between 2004 and 2009.

The report evoked hasty reactions from Opposition parties

in Parliament, leading to adjournment of both Houses. When asked about the report, Coal Minister Sriprakash Jaiswal refused to make any comment on the report. “I can’t comment on the basis on any media reports. If we receive the CAG report, we will analyse it and then take action. I have been the Coal Minister only in the UPA II and during this time no coal block has been given,” he said.

The CAG, however, later issued a statement, saying that the media report on coal mining auction was misleading and that the draft as still in a preliminary stage.

“In the extant case the details being brought out were observations which are under discussion at a very preliminary stage and do not even constitute our pre-final draft and hence are exceedingly misleading,” a CAG statement on the PMO site said.

“...Pursuant to clarification provided by the ministry in exit conferences held on February and March 9, 2012, we have changed our thinking….In fact it is not even our case that the unintended benefit to the allocatee is an equivalent loss to the exchequer. The leak of the initial draft causes great embarrassment as the Audit Report is still under preparation. Such leakage causes very deep anguish,” it added.

Earlier, the method of allocating captive coal blocks were questioned from some quarters. There were also reports of slow progress in the captive blocks mining projects. Subsequently, the government decided to hold auctions so as to attract only serious players.


fEATuRE

Peeved at the slow progress in various captive coal blocks allocated to private and public sector companies, the coal ministry (MoC) has planned to issue showcause notices

to 58 of them, according to minister of state Pratik P. Patil. “The last meeting to review the progress of the captive coal blocks and associated end use projects were held on January 11 and 12, 2012. The committee has given its recommendations and it has been decided to issue showcause notices for de-allocation to allocattees of 58 coal blocks,” Patil said recently in reply to a question in Parliament.

Earlier, the ministry had issued showcause notices to 84 blocks on recommendation of the Review Committee. Based on the clarifications submitted by the allocattees, out of these 84 coal blocks, 14 coal blocks (12 of public sector companies and two of private companies) were deallocated, Patil added.

Participating in the meeting, committee chairperson, additional secretary of coal, Zohra Chatterji, expressed concern over the overall progress of captive coal block/lignite blocks especially for the blocks allotted prior to 2003 and 2004. She intimated the committee that the government is under tremendous pressure due to shortage of coal in the country and no further time can be lost in the development of blocks to meet the demand and supply gap of domestic coal.

She also urged the state governments to enhance their co-operation with the block allocattees in order to clear the pending major milestones in a time-bound manner. She further requested the state governments to resolve law and order problems promptly and to extend necessary assistance for deployment of security camps as per local requirement.

At the review meeting, additional chief secretary, government of Jharkhand, assured all necessary assistance for

speedy disposal of pending issues at the state level. The target of coal production of 36.15 million tons (mt) for 2011-12 (the terminal year of Eleventh Five Year Plan) and 39.2 mt for 2012-13 (the first year of Twelfth Plan) needs to be achieved.

Joint Secretary (Coal) advised all the allocattees to push their projects for early clearance of pending milestones. He requested the Ministry of Power (MoP) to closely monitor the upcoming power projects as well as coal projects allotted for power generation. He also advised the owner of those coal blocks which were rejected earlier for forest clearance by the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) because of ‘No Go Categorisation” to pursue their forest clearance proposal with the State Forest Departments for further consideration. The Coal Controller was directed to give information on opening of “Escrow Accounts” and approval of Mine Closure Plan of captive coal blocks from the next review meeting.

General recommendationsDuring the review of the progress of coal and lignite blocks, the major issues causing delay and action points for reducing the delay in various clearances were identified. The decisions/issues and recommendations were categorised under various heads, including environment and forestry clearances, issues pertaining to state governments, policy issues and other issues.

Issues relating to E&F clearances ♦ The decision taken by GoM at its meeting held on July,

2011 has not percolated to field level. ♦ MOEF may be requested to issue guidelines as per the

decision of the GoM’s meeting

MoC may deallocate 58 blocksCoal Insights Bureau

Source: MoC

Allocation of captive blocks

Year of allocation

No of blocks to govt. companies No of blocks to govt. companies No of blocks to UMPP/for tariff based

bidding

Total net blocks for the year

Gross allotted

De-allocated/surrendered

Net allocated blocks as on

date

Gross allotted

De-allocated/surrendered

Net allocated blocks as on

dateTill 2003 17 - 17 24 2 22 - 392004 4 - 4 1 1 0 - 42005 8 2 6 16 1 15 - 212006 32 6 26 15 - 15 6 472007 34 6 28 17 1 16 1 452008 3 1 2 20 2 18 1 212009 1 1 - 12 - 12 3 152010 - - - - - - 1 12011 (Dec 2011) 1 - 1 1 - 1 2Total 100 16 84 106 7 99 12 195


♦ held on July, 2011 to the regional/field offices of MOEF on Go/No Go issues.

♦ In view of the decision of the GoM, cases which had stopped being processed due to

♦ Go-No Go concept may be taken up by the block allottees again with the State Forest

♦ Departments afresh and their pending applications may be processed by concerned

♦ Forest Departments/MoEF without delay. ♦ The block allocattees in the state of Jharkhand are facing a

serious problem in forest ♦ clearance issues at the State level as individual applicants

are being asked to report on the environmental impact on the entire forest belt in North Karanpura/Hazaribagh as a whole. State Govt. representative was requested to take decision on forest clearance proposals independently on a case to case basis. Impact on the forest belt as a whole could be better assessed by State Forest Department.

♦ Block allocattees should redefine boundaries in consultation with State Forest departments in the case of coal blocks falling in buffer zone or under National Tiger Reserve Forest area and subsequently move forward for forest clearance to MOEF. In case this is not possible Blocks may be de-allocated.

Issues pertaining to state governments ♦ State governments should adhere to the time schedule of

24 months or the time schedule prescribed in allocation condition from the date of allocation for granting of mining lease of captive coal blocks.

♦ The block allocattees in the state of Orissa are facing a serious problem regarding land acquisition and grant of mining lease due to the issue raised by Orissa Govt. for supplying of 33 percent reject based free power to the State Govt. There is no clear cut policy in this regard. Committee asked representative of Govt. of Orissa to issue guidelines in the matter not to hold up clearances on this account till a policy is formalised in consultation with Ministry of Power.

♦ The block allocatees in the state of Jharkhand are facing a serious problem on law and order issues. The representative of State was requested to look into the matter and to ensure full security by deploying CRPF camp as and when requested.

♦ Rehabilitation and Resettlement issue and issue of notification under section 4 of LA Act, at the State Govt. level in case of land acquisition should be settled on priority basis.

Miscellaneous policy issues ♦ As the block allocattees are facing serious problems

regarding transfer of land from subsidiary companies of CIL under CBA Act, Committee advised that subsidiary

coal companies of CIL should urgently transfer the land rights under CBA Act to state government/coal block allocattees. Necessary guidelines to be issued, if necessary.

♦ Decision on reduction of GR cost whenever required should be taken by CMPDIL in consultation with Ministry of Coal on priority basis.

♦ Transfer of surface right and mineral right of land acquired by subsidiary coal companies of CIL to the block allocattees is sometimes a major cause of delay. Committee urged Ministry of Coal to issue concrete guidelines in this regard.

♦ Attention is needed for early settlement of bipartite agreement between subsidiary coal companies and block allocattees without delay.

♦ Pending issues of Mine Plan approval and previous approval under section 5(1) of

♦ MMDR Act in case of grant of mining lease on priority basis need to be cleared expeditiously.

♦ In a case of West Bengal, there is a problem due to overlapping of area for CBM with coal block. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas has accorded permission to extract CBM from the allocated coal block and due to absence of any guidelines, the coal block allocattees are unable to go ahead with the extraction of coal. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas may be requested to issue policy guidelines in order to resolve the overlap issues.

♦ Committee observed that some block owners are willfully delaying the achieving of pending milestones of coal block and EUPs. Committee viewed it seriously and recommended that deduction should be made from the Bank Guarantee corresponding to slippage as per provisions contained in the allocation condition. In this regard, the Ministry of Coal may consider framing policy guidelines regarding quantum of deduction over period of delay.

♦ Committee observed that every allocatee is required to open an Escrow Account with Coal Controller for mine closure prior to opening of mines as per procedure laid down in the guidelines of approved Mine Closure Plan. Compliance may be specifically reported in the next review meeting.

Other issues ♦ One coal block in the state of West Bengal is facing a

serious problem due to construction of Aerotropolis /airport project within the coal block areas. Construction of Aerotropolis is going on the coal block area though the matter is subjudice before the Hon’ble Court. Committee recommended that the State Govt. may be advised to immediately stop construction of Aerotropolis and to intimate the court accordingly.

♦ In order to sort out the problem faced by block allocatees, close monitoring with the concerned state government and MoEF at the level of Ministry of Coal /Coal Controller may be initiated. Regular meetings with Coal Controller/

fEATuRE


fEATuRE

Ministry of Coal and representative of state and Central governments may be organised every three months. Forming a monitoring sub-committee in this regard at the ministry level may be considered.

♦ Joint venture companies formed by the joint allocattees are required to submit a compliance status of Coal Block and associated EUPs of individual allocates to CCO by fifth of the next month after every quarter. Block allocattees were advised to submit the progress reports and renewed BG to CCO without any lapse.

♦ All the allocatees were advised that BG should be submitted by the JVC in case of jointly allocated coal blocks. Individual submission of BGs will not be accepted.From the reported progress, it is seen that production

from a few coal blocks will be started in the year 2011-2012 or the near future as per the indicated schedule. It is the recommendation of the Committee that the allocatees of these coal blocks be advised to start mining or coal production in 2011-12 or as per the indicated schedule of production failing which appropriate action will be initiated.

The progress of the following blocks was not found to be satisfactory but it is seen that these blocks were delayed due to ‘Go/No Go’ categorisation, location in wildlife corridors, allocation to PFC for UMPPs and overlapping of coal bearing

area with CBM/Aerotropolis project. Committee expressed concern over unsatisfactory progress and advised the allocattees whose blocks were held up due to location in No-Go area to pursue their forest diversion proposals since Go/No-Go concept has been done away with. The Committee has also advised the other allocattees to pursue their cases with the concerned authorities and get the requisite forest clearances expedited.

The progress of 58 blocks* was not found to be satisfactory. The Committee expressed concern over unsatisfactory progress and advised to expedite the development of the coal blocks and be cautioned to be careful in future with respect to the milestones stipulated. If they do not improve the performance on the speedy development of the block further, action including deduction of BG or deallocation would be considered.

Blocks which have started production and attained peak rated capacity

Sl no name of coal blocks Allotment year name of allocate/Jv1 Talabira-I 1994 Indal/Hindalco2 Tata (East) 1996 WBSEB/BECML3 Tara (West) 1996 WBPDCL/BECML4&5 Gotitoria (E&W) 1996 BLA Industries6 Gare Palma IV/1 1996 JSPL7 Gare Palma IV/5 1996 Monnet Ispat8 Panchwara Central 2001 PSEB9 Chotia 2003 Prakash Industries

Blocks which have started production but not attained peak rated capacity

Sl no name of coal block Allotment year name of allocattee/Jv1 Sarshatali 1993 CESC/ICML2-3 Gare Palma IV/2&3 1998 Jindal Power4 Gare Palma IV/4 1999 Jayaswal Neco5 Namchik Namphuk 2003 Arunachal PMDCL6-11 Baranj I-IV, Kiloni and

Manora Deep2003 KPCL

12 Gare Palma IV/7 2000 RASL now SEML13 Barjore 2003 WBPDCL/BECML14 Kathautia 2003 Usha Martin15 Tasra 1996 SAIL (IISCO)16 Barjora North 2005 DVC17 Belgaon 2005 SunflagIron&Steel18 Parbatpur Central 2005 Electro Steel Casting19 Marki Mangli-I 2004 B S Ispat20 Marki Mangli-III 2005 Shree Virangana Steel

Captive blocks nearing coal production stage

Sl no name of coal block

Allocation date/target date of

productionname of allocattee

1 Trans Damodar (govt. dispensation) 14.1.05/Mar 2009 WBMDTC (Govt PSU)

2 Khagra Joydev 3.3.05/Mar 2008 DVC (Govt PSU)

3 Sial Ghogri 22.5.07 (revised to 22.8.07)/ Feb 2012 Prism Cement (private)

4-5 Marko Mangli-II & Marki Mangli-IV 6.9.05/Mar 2009

Topworth Urja & Metals Ltd (formally Shree Virangana Steel)

6 Utkal-C 29.5.98/Nov 2001 Utkal Coal Ltd (formally ICCL)

7-8 Parsa (East) & Kanta Basan

25.6.07/Sept 201219.5.07/Sept 2012

Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Ltd

9 Panchwara North 26.4.05/May 2011 WBPDCL

10 Durgapur II/Taraimar

6.11.07/Normative datere-fixedonMay 2012

Balco

11 Gare Palma Sector-III 12.11.08/May 2012 Goa Industrial

Development Corp

12 Fatehpur East 23.1.08/Oct 2013

JLD Yavatmal Energy, RKM Powergen Ltd, Vandana Vidyut, Visa Power, Green Infrastructure

13 Ganeshpur 28.5.09/Nov 2013 Tata Steel & Adhunik Thermal Energy

14-15 Sahapur (East) & Sahapur (West) 25.7.07/April 2014 NMDC

16 Bicharpur 25.7.07/April 2014 Madhya Pradesh State Mining Corp. Ltd

17 Marki Zari Jamani Adkoli 2.8.06/June 2013 MSMCL

18 Andal East 3.7.09/April 2015Bhusan Steel, Jai Balaji Industries Ltd, Rashmi Cements

*The complete list of 58 captive blocks is given overleaf.


fEATuRE


fEATuRE


fEATuRE


fEATuRE

The Trans-Damodar Coal Block (TDBC), which had been allocated to state agency West Bengal Mineral Development & Trading Corporation Limited

(WBMDTCL) by Union Coal Ministry in 2005 for extraction, distribution and marketing of coal, has started production. Coal reserves at the block stands at around 103.15 million tons (mt).

The TDBC on February 24, 2012, floated an advertisement offering coal from its block. The coal will be offered through e-auction platform to Micro & Small Enterprises Sector and General Industrial Consumers located within West Bengal.

As per the state dispensation policy of the Ministry of Coal, the WBMDTCL had been allocated six coal blocks viz., Trans-Damodar at Bankura, Jaganathpur A, Jaganathpur B, Kulti, Sitarampur and Ichhapur – all at Bardhaman.

According to the Geological Survey of India, total coal reserves at these six blocks stands at 1307.15 million ton (mt), of which Ichhapur with an area of 10 sq. km and Kulti with an area of 7.5 sq. km, contribute 335 mt and 210 mt of coal respectively. Coal reserves at Jagannathpur A, having area of 11.68 sq. km & Jagannathpur B having an area of 8.15 sq. km are found to be at 273 mt and 176 mt, while Sitarampur with an area of 8.0 sq. km, has coal reserves of 210 mt.

WBMDTCL, the wholly owned government of West Bengal undertaking, under commerce & industries department, was incorporated in the year 1973. It has been engaged in the field of mining and trading of mineral resources like rock phosphate, blackstone, granite, quartz and fireclay spread over mostly in the districts of Bardhaman, Bankura, Birbhum and Purulia. Coal, which was practically under the exclusive purview of Central government sectors after nationalisation, was not worked by the corporation till this sector was opened up recently for state PSUs, under new coal mining policy of the government of India.

The TDCB is the only state owned coal block to reach production stage and is spread over an area of about 8 sq. km out of which 694 acres will be mined through Open Cast Method (OCM). The block is situated in the South Eastern part of Raniganj Coalfield in the District of Bankura, West Bengal. This project under the PPP model is taken under a competitive bidding by a joint venture of three companies, namely, Godavari Commodities Ltd. (GCL), Banowari Lal Agarwal Pvt Ltd. (BLAPL) and Calcutta Industrial Supply Corporation, a partnership firm.

Trans Damodar coal block starts production Sumit Kedia

Captive blocks allocated to WBMDTC

name of the party

Date of Allotment

Sl.no.of the block allocated

Indiviudal (I) Jointly

(J)

Block allocated

Coal fields State Private (P) /

govt. (g) End -Use

Captive Dispensation=cd, govt. Disp.=gd,

Ultra Mega Power Proj. (UMPP)

State of End Use

Pland (EUP)

geological reserves

Mt

Status of Exploration

West Bengal Mineral Development Trading Corp.

14.01.2005 47 I Trans Damodar

Damodar Raniganj

West Bengal G Commercial gd West

Bengal 103.15 E


02.08.2006 115 I Ichhapur Raniganj West Bengal G Commercial gd West

Bengal 335 RE


02.08.2006 116 I Kulti - West Bengal G Commercial gd West

Bengal 210 RE


25.07.2007 146 I Jaganathpur A Raniganj West

Bengal G Commercial gd West Bengal 273 RE


25.07.2007 147 I Jaganathpur B Raniganj West

Bengal G Commercial gd West Bengal 176 RE


27.12.2007 174 I Sitarampur Raniganj West Bengal G Commercial gd West

Bengal 210 E

Source: MoC


fEATuRE

The ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) is “thinking” on the line of revising the norms for use of washed coal in thermal power plants (TPPs), a ministry

official said.The existing norms allow the use of maximum 34 percent

ash coal (on annual average basis) for utilities located beyond 1,000 km from pit head or in critically polluted and ecologically sensitive areas or in urban areas.

Under the proposed norms, the distance criterion will be reduced to 500 km from the pit head. Also, the reference census for identification of urban areas will be the latest one instead of 1991 census. Additionally, the measurement would be changed to monthly/daily average from the current practice of annual average.

The justification behind the proposals is that the cost of carrying coal to a distance of say 1,000 km is not found economical if the coal contains excessive ash content. If the distance criterion is reduced, the TPPs will benefit in terms of getting higher quality coal which in turn would reduce the effective cost incurred on carrying coal to the plants. This will also help reduce the pollution and hence benefit the environment, the official said.

These measures, however, are currently at the level of “thinking” and would be finalised only through discussion with various stakeholders, he added.

Captive units under ambitThe ministry is also planning to apply its norms for the use of washed coal in TPPs to large captive power plants, MoEF sources said.

“Not only the thermal power stations, the ministry is considering bringing captive power plants of 100 MW capacity and above under the ambit of notification,” the sources said.

Asked to comment on the proposals, the Independent Captive Power Producers Association (ICPPA) said the measures, while looking well meaning, may not be practical as far as the ash and distance criteria are concerned.

“What will they do if a plant located at 1,000 km from pit head does not get the stipulated quality of coal? Will they close down the plant?” ICPPA sources said. “The ministry needs to look at all aspects before finalising its proposals,” they added.

Pilot ETS schemeMeanwhile, the MoEF has also planned to launch the pilot emission trading scheme (ETS) scheme in India. The official said the objective of the ETS will be to control the particulate matter (PM). To start with, pilot ETS will be carried out in

three states, namely Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat. In Maharashtra, five cities and clusters will be brought

under the ETS coverage, namely Aurangabad, Tarapur, Chandrapur, Jhalna and Kohlapur. The selected industries will be large or medium, have at least one CEMS in suitable stack and be the highest emitters of PM.

In Tamil Nadu, the clusters would include Ambattur, Chennai, Maraimalai, Sriperumpudur and Tiruvallur. Selected industries will lie within 50 km radius of Chennai city, be large or medium and will have at least one CEMS suitable stack.

In Gujarat, cities like Surat, Vapi and Ahmedabad will be monitored under the scheme. Selected industries will lie within a 20 km radius of the respective city, have at least one CEMS suitable stack and be the highest emitters of PM.

Status of pollution in industrial clusters

no Industrial cluster/area Air Water land

Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index

(CEPI)

1 Ankleshwar (Gujarat) 72.00 72.75 75.75 88.50

2 Vapi (Gujarat) 74.00 74.50 72.00 88.09

3 Ghaziabad (Uttar Pradesh) 68.50 75.25 71.50 87.37

4 Chandrapur (Maharashtra) 70.75 67.50 66.50 83.88

5 Korba (Chhattisgarh) 67.00 57.00 72.50 83.00

6 Bhiwadi (Rajasthan) 71.00 69.00 59.50 82.91

7 Angul Talcher (Orissa) 64.00 69.00 65.75 82.09

8 Vellor (North Arcot) Tamilnadu) 69.25 65.25 62.50 81.79

9 Singrauli (Uttar Pradesh) 70.50 64.00 59.50 81.73

10 Ludhiana (Punjab) 68.00 66.00 64.75 81.66

11

Nazafgarh drain basin (including Anand Parvat, Naraina, Okhla and Wazirpur), Delhi

52.13 69.00 65.25 79.54

12 Noida (Uttar Pradesh) 65.75 64.00 60.00 78.90

13 Dhanbad (Jharkhand) 64.50 59.00 65.50 78.63

14 Dombivalli (Maharashtra) 66.00 63.50 57.50 78.41

15 Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) 66.00 63.50 56.00 78.09

Source: MoEF

MoEF may revise norms for washed coal used in TPPs



fEATuRE

The Union Budget 2012-13 was a mixed bag for the metals and mining sector. While the increase in excise duty would be marginally negative for metal

producers, exemption from import duty on coal would be slightly positive for thermal coal importers, including non-ferrous metal producers, JSW Steel and some sponge iron producers.

Moreover, the increase in customs duty on non-alloy flat-rolled steel from 5.0 percent to 7.5 percent would be slightly positive for flat steel producers.

Expectations• Increase in import duty on steel from the current level of

5 percent.• Removal of import duty/CVD on thermal coal from

current levels of 5 percent/5 percent.• Hike of excise duty to 12 percent, from 10 percent.

Announced measures• Excise duty has been raised to 12 percent, as expected.• Import duty on flat steel products has been increased to 7.5

percent, from 5 percent.• For the infrastructure (mainly power) sector, import duty

on thermal coal has been removed, while CVD has been reduced to 1 percent, from 5 percent.

Impact: A mixed bag• Higher import duty on flats positive for steel companies.

The increase in import duty on flat steel to 7.5 percent (from 5 percent) is positive for domestic steel companies.

• Flat steel producers should benefit from this development while margins for long steel producers would not decline. JSW Steel should benefit the most as flat products contribute 75-80 percent to its volumes, followed by SAIL (flat steel represents 55-60 percent volumes) and Tata Steel (flat steel accounts for 55-60 percent of domestic volumes).

• Hike in excise duty is negative for non-ferrous companies. The hike of excise duty to 12 percent (from 10 percent) is negative for non-ferrous companies, as their net realisations will now decrease accordingly. Hindalco and Sterlite should be most impacted from this move, followed by Nalco and Hindustan Zinc.

• Removal of import duty/cut in CVD on thermal coal is negative for Coal India. Removal of import duty (currently 5 percent) on thermal coal and the cut in CVD to 1 percent (from 5 percent) are negatives for Coal India as its e-auction realisations will decline with the decline in landed cost of imported coal. E-auction contributes about 10 percent to Coal India’s volumes and 40-45 percent to EBITDA.

• No substantial impact on pure-play miners. Pure-play miners such as Sesa Goa, NMDC and MOIL should see little impact from the changes proposed in the Union Budget.

Union Budget a mixed bag for metals, mining sectors


Metals

Announcement Impact

Increase in excise duty from the current level of 10% to 12%. This would be slightly negative for steel, sponge, non-ferrous metal producers.

Full exemption from import duty on thermal coal (5% currently) up to FY2014 and decrease in countervailing duty from 5% to 1%.

This would be positive for coal importers, such as Nalco, Hindalco, Sterlite Industries and JSW Steel.

Decrease in basic customs duty on machinery from 7.5% currently to 2.5% for settingupironorebeneficiationandpelletplants.

Thiswouldbeslightlypositiveforsteelmakerssettinguppelletandbeneficiationplants.

Increaseincustomsdutyonnon-alloyflat-rolledsteelfrom5.0%to7.5%. Thiswouldbeslightlypositiveforflatsteelproducers,suchasBhushanSteel,SAIL, JSW Steel and Tata Steel.

Decrease in import duty on machinery used for prospecting in mining from 10.0/7.5% to 2.5%; Abolition of customs duty for coal mining projects. Positive for mining companies and steel companies undertaking mining projects.


fEATuRE

The government has proposed a slew of steps including customs duty exemption on imported fuel and lower levy on overseas funds for projects to provide relief to

crisis-hit power sector. Unveiling various proposals for the power sector in the

Union Budget 2012-13, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee said that, "In power generation, fuel supply constraints are affecting production prospects".

Permitting power companies to tap External Commercial Borrowing (ECB) route to part re-finance rupee debt on power plants and increasing power sector's tax-free bonds limit to `10,000 crore from `5,000 crore are also among the Budget proposals.

"Producers of thermal power have been under stress because of high prices of coal. I propose to ease the situation by providing full exemption from basic customs duty and a concessional CVD of 1 percent to steam coal for a period of two years till March 31, 2014," Mukherjee said in his Budget speech. At present, imported coal attracts a customs levy of around 5 percent.

Full basic duty exemptions would be extended to power plant fuels such as natural gas and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), uranium concentrate, sintered uranium dioxide in natural and pellet form.

In a move that would reduce overall debt cost, withholding tax on ECB would be cut to 5 percent from 20 percent for three years. Further, the last date for power generating projects to seek tax holiday has been extended by one more year till March 31, 2013.

"Additional depreciation of 20 percent in the initial year

is proposed to be extended to new assets acquired by power generation companies," Mukherjee said. "There are signs of recovery in coal, fertilisers, cement and electricity sectors. These are core sectors that have an impact on the entire economy," he said.

The Association of Power Producers (APP), a group of about 22 private entities, said the budget proposals announced would go a long way in incentivising the power sector and benefiting the end consumer.

These proposals come against the backdrop of severe fuel shortage as well as funding issues hurting the power sector, which is expected to see a capacity addition of over 80,000 MW in the Twelfth Plan (2012-17).

Budget proposes slew of steps forcrisis-hit power sector


Power

Announcement Impact

Waiver of basic custom duty on coal Waiver of basic custom duty on coal is a substantial positive for many private sector power generators, such as Adani Power and JSW Energy, who rely on imported coal for running their plants.

Extension of tax exemption under 80-IA for power generation companies until FY2013.

As per Section 80-IA exemptions, ower plants are eligible for a tax holiday of 10 years from the year of commissioning of the plants. The exemption under this section was applicable to power plants commencing operations before FY2012 and has now been extended until FY2013. However, companieshavetopaytaxunderMATprovisions.Extensionof80-IAbenefitswouldhaveapositiveimpact on private sector power generation companies. Some of the companies, which would majorly benefitincludeAdaniPowerandTataPower

Someotherpositiveannouncementsforthepowersectorincludetax-freebondsworth`10,000crforfinancingthepowersector,allowingECBstopartfinancerupeedebts of existing power projects and reduction of withholding tax on interest payments on ECBs from 20% to 5%. In all, the budget is expected to have a positive impact on the power sector.


fEATuRE

Power generation by Indian power plants in February 2012 stood at 70,988.48 MU against a target of 68,542.65 MU for the month, according to provisional data made

available by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA).The generation in February 2012 was also higher compared

to 65,708.32 MU generated during the corresponding month of the previous year. The target set for February 2011 was 66,692.50 MU, the data revealed. The electricity generation in January 2012 was 73,396 MU against a target of 73,377.66 MU, whereas total generation in December 2011 stood at 72,717.69 MU against a target of 71,241.6 MU set for the month.

Of the total generation in February 2012, the thermal sector accounted for 60,980.21 MU, while 2,702.30 MU was generated by the nuclear sector. The hydro sector contributed 7,237.60 MU and Bhutan imports accounted for the remaining 68.37 MU. The target for generation in thermal sector for the month was 59,922 MU, while that for the nuclear and hydro sectors was 1,927 MU and 6,645.65 MU, respectively. The target for Bhutan import was 48 MU.

In February 2011, the achieved figures of power generation by various sectors stood at 55,749.25 MU for thermal, 2,653.80 MU for nuclear and 7,241.39 MU for the hydro sector. The remaining 63.88 MU was contributed by Bhutan imports during the month.

During the first eleven months (April-February) of 2011-12, the Indian power utilities generated 797,268.41 MU whereas the figure stood at 735,606.73 MU during the corresponding period of the previous year.

Capacity additionThe power utilities in India added 972 MW of generation capacity in February 2012 taking the total capacity addition during the first eleven months of 2011-12 to 13,332.5 MW, according to provisional data released by CEA.

Capacity addition in February 2011 was 250 MW and that during the first eleven months of 2010-11 was 11,654.5 MW, the data revealed. In January 2012, total capacity addition stood at 895 MW against a target of 2,245 MW. In December 2011, capacity addition was 1,158 MW against a target of only 71 MW.

In February 2012, capacity added in the thermal sector was 972 MW while capacity addition in the hydro and nuclear sectors both stood at nil. The capacity addition target was 250 MW for thermal sector, 132 MW for hydro and 1,000 MW for nuclear sectors, the CEA data revealed.

In February 2011, capacity added in the thermal sector stood at 250 MW against a target of 851 MW. Capacity added in hydro and nuclear sectors both stood at nil, against targets of 165 MW and nil, respectively.

Critical coal stock Inadequate coal supplies by domestic coal companies and lower imports by power utilities have led to critical coal stock position at a number of Indian power plants.

According to data available with Coal Insights, a total of 34 plants of the total 89 in the country were faced with critical coal stock position of less than seven days as on February 29. The data further shows that out of the 34 plants facing ‘critical coal stock’ position, 25 were facing ‘super critical’ coal stock position of less than four days.

On February 15, out of the 37 plants facing critical coal stock position of less than seven days, 30 were facing ‘super critical’ coal stock position of less than four days. Plants in Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, Bihar and West Bengal were the worst sufferers.

Plant load factorThe Plant Load Factor (PLF), a measure of the output of

86%

4%

0%10%

Thermal Nuclear Hydro Bhutan Import

Categorywise energy generation – February 2012 (in %)

Source: Cental Electricity Authority

Indian plants generate 70,988.48 MU in FebSanjukta Ganguly

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Central State Sector Pvt. Utl. Sector All India

Program Achivement

All India PLF factor – February 2012 (in %)



fEATuRE

a power plant compared to the maximum output it could produce, for the country for the month of February 2012 stood at 78.47 percent against the planned 70.38 percent. The PLF was 76.38 percent and 75.83 percent for January 2012 and December 2011, respectively.

The PLF of power plants of central sector run companies such as NTPC and DVC in February 2012 stood at 89.59 percent compared with 86.39 percent achieved in January 2012. The plants in the private sector recorded a PLF of 74.37 percent against the planned 67.03 percent.

The worst performer was GMDCL, which recorded a PLF of 36.13 percent against a target of 72.41 percent. JSEB which recorded a PLF of 8.99 percent against a target of 27.99 percent continued to be a poor performer.

Power supply positionIn the month of February 2012, the country’s peak power demand was estimated at 78,067 MU, but actual availability was only 69,430 MU, reflecting a shortfall of 8,637 MU or 11.1 percent.

Earlier, in the month of January 2012, the country’s peak power demand was estimated at 81,061 MU, but actual availability was only 73,498 MU, reflecting a shortfall of 7,563 MU or 9.3 percent.

An interesting observation is that despite overall peak shortage of power in the country in February 2012, Chandigarh, Lakshadweep, Andaman & Nicobar islands and Sikkim did not have any peak power shortages, according to data made available by CEA. Maharashtra, however, faced the highest shortfall among all states during peak period with a total shortfall of 2,199 MU.

Tamil Nadu recorded the second highest shortfall during the month under review. The state recorded total shortfall of 1,609 MU in February 2012, against 942 MU in January 2012. Madhya Pradesh continued to be a poor performer recording a shortfall of 1,011 MU against 892 MU in January 2012. Uttar Pradesh (854 MU versus 933 MU in January) also faced major peak period shortfall during the month.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Thermal Hydro Nuclear

Target Achievement


Achievement vs target in capacity addition (in MW)


fEATuRE

Power utilities’ coal import target forFY’13 raised to 70 mt


The Central Electricity Authority (CEA), a department of Ministry of Power, responsible for keeping a watch on various developments in the power sector, has

increased the coal import target of both imported as well as indigenous coal based power utilities for the financial year 2012-13 to 70 million tons (mt) compared to the 2011-12 target of 55 mt, a senior official of CEA told Coal Insights.

“The coal import target for indigenous coal based power plants has been set at 46 mt for financial year 2012-13 while the assessment for coal import by imported coal based power plants is 24 mt,” the official said, adding that, “We do set targets for indigenous coal based power plants, but only come out with assessments for imported coal based plants.”

Asked whether the target of 46 mt import by indigenous coal based power plants is feasible considering that fact that the import by such plants in 2011-12 is likely to be only around 80 percent of the target of 35 mt, the official said, “We expect that at least 40 mt of coal will be imported in 2012-13 by plants designed to run on indigenous coal for blending purpose.”

“We have to set a higher import target for indigenous coal based power plants as actual imports by them had traditionally been lower than the target,” the official added.

“As far as imported coal based power plants are considered,

they too are expected to import around 85-90 percent of the target,” he said.

According to information available with Coal Insights, the indigenous coal based power plants had imported a total of around 22.94 mt coal between April 2011 and January 2012 against their target of 29.17 mt whereas imported coal based power plants’ coal import during the period stood at 15.8 mt against a target of 18 mt. The total coal import by utilities stood at 40.6 mt, which was 80 percent of the target of 50.5 mt for the period.

Coal import target for indigenous coal based power plants in 2012-13

S. no. name of Power Plants

Target for 2012-13 (in

million tons)

Target for 2011-12 (in

million tons)1 HPGCL 2.00 1.452 CLP 1.00 NA3 RRVUNL 2.00 1.454 UPRVUNL 1.00 1.085 Reliance (Rosa) 0.90 0.306 Lanco (Anpara) 0.90 NA7 CSEB 0.20 0.208 Torrent (AEC) 0.50 0.509 GSECL 1.50 1.4810 MPPGCL 0.80 0.8011 NTPC-SAIL Power Plant 0.40 0.3012 Lanco (Pathadih) 0.40 NA13 Mahagenco 3.50 3.3514 RIL (Dahanu) 0.6 0 0.6015 APGENCO 1.60 1.6016 TNEB 2.00 1.8017 KPCL 1.50 0.9018 DVC 3.00 1.7319 CESC 0.50 0.5020 WBPDCL 1.00 1.0021 NTPC -Indira Gandhi 1.00 0.3022 NTPC 16.00 15.4523 Bajaj Hindustan 0.30 NA 24 TVNL 0.20 NA25 Vedanta (Sterlite) 1.00 NA26 Vedanta (Balco) 0.30 NA27 NTPC (JV) –Vellur 0.40 NA28 Adani (Tiroda) 1.00 NA29 Tata Power (Maithon) 0.50 0.21 Total (Indigenous Coal Based) 46.00 35.00 Total (Imported Coal based) 24.00 20.00

JSW Energy, Udupi TPP, Torangallu, Adani Power, Mundra, Wardha Warora TPP, Trombay etc)

grand Total 70.00 55.00


fEATuRE

With infrastructural sector showing an improvement in demand, the cement sector in India has witnessed an increase in production during the month of

January as compared to the previous month as well as the same month a year ago. More investment in the infrastructural sector is likely to give a boost to the cement industry in the coming days, feel the industry experts.

Production scenarioIndia’s cement production by large plants, except ACC and Ambuja Cement, in January 2012 moved up 10.99 percent to 16.45 million tons (mt) compared to 14.82 mt in the corresponding month of 2011, according to information made available to ICMW by a member of the Cement Manufacturers’ Association (CMA).

The production in January 2012 was also 4.64 percent higher compared with 15.72 mt in December 2011.

The production by ACC and Ambuja in January 2012 was 2.25 mt and 1.91 mt respectively and if their production is taken into account, the total cement production of the country would be 20.61 mt.

With this, the total production (except ACC and Ambuja) during the first ten months (April-January) of 2011-12 stood at 144.98 mt, up 5.7 percent from 137.16 mt during the same period of 2010-11.

India’s clinker production by large plants, except ACC and Ambuja Cement, in January 2012, stood at 12.35 mt, up 11.46 percent over 11.08 mt produced in the corresponding month of the previous year. Clinker production in December 2011 stood at 11.96 mt. Clinker production of India during the first ten months (April-January) of 2011-12 stood at 111.37 mt, up marginally by 2.04 percent from 109.14 mt during the corresponding period of 2010-11.

Despatches India’s cement despatches by large plants, except ACC and Ambuja Cement, in January 2012 stood at 16.25 mt, up 10.32 percent as compared to 14.73 mt in the corresponding month of 2011, according to information made available to ICMW by a member of CMA. Total cement despatches in December 2011 stood at 15.76 mt, he said.

The despatches (except ACC and Ambuja) during the first ten months (April-January) of 2011-12 stood at 143.94 mt, up from 136.18 mt during the corresponding period of 2010-11.

Performance of cement majorsUltraTech Cement Ltd, an Aditya Birla Group company,

reported February cement production of 3.47 mt, down 8.2 percent compared with 3.78 mt produced in January. The company’s production in February was, however, 4.96 percent higher compared with 3.29 mt produced during the same month of 2011.

The cement production during the first eleven months (April-February) of 2011-12 stood at 35.73 mt against 34.68 mt produced during the same period of 2010-11.

UltraTech’s cement despatches or sales in February stood at 3.52 mt, down 5.38 percent compared with 3.72 mt despatched in January. The despatches in February were, however, 5.67 percent higher compared with 3.32 mt despatched in February 2011.

The cement despatches during the first eleven months (April-February) of 2011-12 stood at 35.74 mt, up 3.2 percent compared with 34.63 mt despatched during the corresponding period of 2010-11.

Another leading cement maker, ACC Ltd’s cement production dropped by 10.84 percent to 2.14 mt in February 2012 compared with 2.25 mt in January. However, the production in February was up 8.63 percent as compared with 1.97 mt produced in February 2011, the company said in a release. The company’s despatches or sales in February dropped by 3.59 percent and stood at 2.15 mt as compared to 2.23 mt in January. Cement despatches of ACC cement stood at 2 mt in February 2011.

Ambuja Cement Ltd’s February production stood at 1.99 mt, up 4.19 percent as compared to 1.91 mt produced during during the last month. In February 2011, production stood at 1.79 mt. The company had sold 2 mt of cement during February 2012 while during corresponding month of last year the company’s cement despatch stood at 1.77 mt, Ambuja Cements said in a statement.

Dec cement exports India’s cement exports, except ACC and Ambuja Cement, in January 2012 stood at 0.16 mt, up 14.29 percent from 0.14 mt during the corresponding month of 2010, according to information made available to Coal Insights.

The exports during the first ten months (April-January) of 2011-12 stood at 1.38 mt, up 7.81 percent compared with 1.28 mt exported during the same period of 2010-11.

Meanwhile, exports of clinker in January 2012 fell by 14.29 percent to 0.18 mt from 0.21 mt in January 2011. The exports during the first ten months of 2011-12 stood at 1.52 mt, down 31.22 percent from 2.21 mt during the corresponding period of 2010-11.

India’s Jan cement productionup nearly 10.9%

Sanjukta Ganguly


spECIAL fEATuRE

Recovering carbon from flue gas

On the threshold of infinite energy?Coal Insights Bureau

Just how many times have you heard these words – oil peak, coal peak, or simply energy crisis? How many

times have you cursed the consuming class for the imminent shortage in fossil fuels….and made that doomsday prediction, ie the time when the world will run out of fuel!

Strangely, there is no dearth of energy around us. There is more energy in nature than we can ever exhaust. In other words, the energy crisis is not about a shortage of energy. It’s only that we are unable to tap it, except from a few known sources, mainly fossil fuels. But what if we could break that barrier….!

There is magic in nature. Everything here comes in a cycle or a chain; eg. life cycle, food chain, oxygen or water cycle. Likewise there could be an energy cycle too. The key to entering this cycle could be the gateway to the mankind’s search for an infinite source of energy, affordable and non-polluting.

In the recently held Coal Asia 2012


conference in Delhi, Dr Endre Simonyi, a professor of chemical sciences at Universitas Budensis and the Pázmány Péter Catholic University in Hungary, proposed just as much. Successful extraction of carbon from flue gas (discharged by the thermal power plants) can change the way the world looks at energy issues, he

suggested. It will not only provide a new source of fuel, but will help cleanse the air as well. And yet, it’s not just simple carbon capture and sequestration, but a step way forward.

Claiming that such a process can be successfully developed, at least at the laboratory level, Dr Simonyi demonstrated his experiment before a select audience that included the representatives of India’s coal fraternity.

While the detail of the experiment, which is pending patent and sponsors, was not to be shared with, the following excerpts from his demonstration may give a broad hint to a whole new world of possibilities!

The energy scenarioIn the present global energy scenario, said Dr Simonyi, coal fired power plants are the cheapest energy producers ($0.05 - 0.08/kwh), but they also produce the largest quantity of greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. This poses a problem of balancing power generation growth with environmental sustainability.

The world’s biggest energy users can be found in the northern temperate zone. The biggest amount of sunbeam reaches the area of the equator, the northern parts of Africa, India, the southern region of United States and China. To some extent, the problem of a balance between power production and environmental sustainability can be solved by producing solar energy where there is sufficient sunbeam and then transporting the same by tubes to places where it is needed the most. But the costs of this method are humongous.

“Solar energy plants are the cleanest but their cost of investment is very high (US $2,500 to 3,500/kw),” Dr Simonyi said.

In the temperate zone, the annual dispersion of energy is not adequate either. Most of the energy is needed in winter; however the sunbeams are the least effective in that season. In summer, the number of sunbeams is too much, while in winter it is too few. The situation is the same at the above mentioned energy producing areas too.

spECIAL fEATuRE

What is flue gas?Coal Insights Bureau

According to popular definition, flue gas is the gas emitted into the atmosphere via a flue, which is a pipe or channel for releasing exhaust gases from

a fireplace, oven, furnace, boiler or steam generator. In many cases, the flue gas refers to the combustion exhaust gas produced at power plants. The composition of flue gas depends on what is being burned.

However, it usually consists of mostly nitrogen (typically more than two-thirds or around 79 percent) derived from the combustion air, carbon dioxide (CO2 – 8 to 14 percent) and water vapor as well as excess oxygen (also derived from the combustion air; 2 to 6 percent). Flue gas further contains a small percentage of a number of pollutants, such as particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulphur oxides.

Flue gas scrubbingAt power plants, flue gas is generally treated with a series of chemical processes and scrubbers, which help remove pollutants. Electrostatic precipitators or fabric filters remove particulate matter and flue-gas desulphurisation captures the sulphur dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels, particularly coal. Nitrogen oxides are treated either by modifications to the combustion process to prevent their formation, or by high temperature or catalytic reaction with ammonia or urea. In either case, the objective is to produce nitrogen gas, rather than nitrogen oxides. In the US, there is a rapid deployment of technologies to remove mercury from flue gas – typically by adsorption on sorbents or by capture in inert solids as part of the flue-gas desulphurisation product. Such scrubbing can lead to meaningful recovery of sulphur for further industrial use.

Technologies based on regenerative capture by amines for the removal of CO2 from flue gas have been deployed to provide high purity gas to the food industry. They are now under active research as a method for CO2 capture for long-term storage as a means of greenhouse gas remediation.

There are a range of emerging technologies for removing pollutants emitted from power plants. As yet, there is very little performance data available from large-scale industrial applications of such technologies, and none has achieved significant penetration of the enormous worldwide market. Source: C Michael Hogan. 2011. Sulfur. Encyclopedia of Earth, eds. A.Jorgensen and C J Cleveland, National Council for Science and the environment, Washington DC

Dr Endre Simonyi


The real solution would be producing the energy in summer where it is needed, and then storing it till winter. But there haven't been any effective or profitable methods for doing this yet. There are only a few methods for storing the energy for a few hours. With electrical energy even this is impossible. “Electrical energy is the best form of energy for the industry but storing big amounts through long times is insolvable at a low price,” he observed.

A solution proposed “If you ask one of your well-trained chemist acquaintances, whether there is a chemical reaction that can, from the flue gas of coal-fired power plants, produce coal in aqueous solution, without external

spECIAL fEATuRE

The major advantages of the new process could be as follows: ♦ It is feasible anywhere on the earth, and this really can’t be

told about too many energy supplying processes ♦ The only technology that not only doesn’t increase carbon-

dioxide emission, but actually decreases it ♦ The only technology that manufactures conventional,

high quality fossil fuel (and also valuable products such as material for the production of car tires)

♦ The only technology that can terminate the carbon-dioxide emission of the biggest carbon-dioxide emitter

♦ There is no security risk (Neither because of a natural disaster, nor because of terrorism)

♦ It frees important countries from the dependence of energy transports transported from risk-full countries

♦ It is a product that can be stored for unlimited time, securely and with low costs

♦ It is a product that can be sent anywhere, without building up an expensive infrastructure

Dr Endre Simonyi has got two engineering diplomas (a chemical engineer – 1960, and a process control engineer – 1964, both from Budapest University of Technology and Economics) and a PhD degree. He worked, among other places, at the Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Currently, he is lecturing at the Universitas Budensis and the Pázmány Péter Catholic University. His first patented innovation was presented in 1964. In 2007, the inventor made as many patent applications as the biggest Hungarian university. Other than his pursuits for new inventions, Dr Simonyi is associated with forensic sciences and with the Electrotechnical, Electronical and Infocommunicational Department of the Budapest chamber of forensic experts since its formation (1994).

“There are reactions known for reducing carbon-dioxide. Even to methane. But there is no such reaction known that goes to coal and nowhere further.”

energy, on atmospheric pressure and at room temperature, the answer is going to be, there is no such reaction,” said Dr Simonyi, “But attendees of the Coal Asia 2012 saw this.”

The demonstration showed the professor pouring his “magic” chemical into two test tubes, one containing tap water and another soda water. The chemical prepared when added to the solutions took approximately 15 to 20 minutes to leave a precipitation. This precipitated black substance is claimed to be carbon or coal.

“Nowadays,” said Dr Simonyi, “scientists work out hundreds of new reactions daily. So a new one is not such a significant discovery. The oxidation of coal is a highly exothermic process (the most popular burn), its reversal is strongly endothermic. So endothermic, that the thermal decomposition of carbon-dioxide starts only over 2500°C. For this reaction to still occur, a really strong reducing effect is needed. But not too strong! There are reactions known for reducing carbon-dioxide. Even to methane. But there is no such reaction known that goes to coal and nowhere further.”

Economic significanceThe oil age, economists say, would not come to an end due to depletion of all crude oil reserves, but because such reserves will no longer be economical to extract. Any new technology in energy field thus must be commercially viable.

Talking about his discovery, Dr Simonyi said the major advantage of this process could be its economical viability and easy accessibility. “This could be an essentially important sensation of basic research, environment and economy,” he said.

As for countries like India, the new discovery can help supplement the scarce energy sources. Although India has abundant coal reserves, noted Dr Simonyi, “Your coal mines don’t produce enough coal for your power plants.”

One last word of caution – although the reduction of carbon-dioxide is a vital part of the invention, however, the regeneration of the “reduction agent” without the cleansing of the coal wouldn’t be worth anything. “We have the method for doing this too,” he assured.


Biodesulfurization is a technology which makes use of a bio-chemical scrubber for the pre-cleaning of gas streams such as biogas, sour natural gas, landfill gas,

unconventional gas streams such as syngas, Coal Bed Methane (CBM), shale gas as well as vent gas, tail gas and acid gas streams. Is the process economical? Is the process efficient? During the recent Coal Asia 2012 Conference held in Delhi, a presentation was made on “Biodesulfurization of H2S from Syngas for Coal Gasification using the BioskrubberTM Process” by Chandan Gadgil, CEO of Innovative Environmental Technologies, Pune, as a new technology for sulphur removal from syngas.

Innovative Environmental Technologies Ltd offers the BioskrubberTM, an indigenous bio-chemical based, economically attractive gas cleaning technology.

The Bioskrubber™ can be viewed as a caustic type of

Hydrogen Sulphide Removal System in which the spent caustic solution is continuously regenerated in a bioreactor using a biocatalyst.

The hydroxide containing scrubbing liquid is passed in a counter-current flow with the H2S-containing gas during which the gas is scrubbed from H2S up to 99 percent. The sulphide-containing scrubbing liquid is then directed to the bioreactor where the sulphide is oxidized by aerobic microorganisms into elemental biological sulphur and hydroxide used in the scrubber is regenerated in this biological step. The marginal bleed stream consisting of sodium salts is sulphide free and can in most cases easily be discharged.

Advantages of BioskrubberTM

♦ BioskrubberTMuses a clean-technology process with a very high H2S removal efficiency of over 99 percent.

♦ Low operating cost for our H2S removal system as compared to other available gas scrubbing technologies as up to 90 percent caustic recycled.

♦ Over 30 commercial plants successfully operating for the last 15 years

♦ Operation at ambient temperature and pressure ♦ Bioskrubber™has an optimised design, suitable for

continuous operation without stoppage. ♦ No expensive catalysts and chemicals required ♦ Robust, reliable and time tested system suitable for varying

atmospheric temperatures. ♦ Low effluent generation by this H2S removal system. ♦ Biological sulfur called SulfabactTM(patent pending) with

80-90 percent purity is co-produced, which is an excellent natural sulfur nutrient for soil with a very high commercial value.

SulfabactTM

SulfabactTM is biological sulfur recovered from the bioreactor in the BioskrubberTM system. SulfabactTM has been proven as a valuable soil nutrient with a very high commercial value. Sulfur is the next important nutrient after N, P and K. The use of sulfur results in higher yield, more greening, lesser use of fungicides, pesticides and rodenticides. The lower pH caused by use of sulfur results in the unlocking of nutrients originally unavailable in alkaline soil. SulfabactTM has advantages over conventional S Soil nutrients as follows:

♦ Presence of Sulfur Oxidizing Bacteria(SOB): SulfabactTM contains SOB, due to which there is no dependence on soil SOB for sulfur availability an in elemental sulfur

♦ No leaching: As the SOB in SulfabactTM convert the sulfur to sulfate in-situ, it does not get leached out by excessive irrigation, rains and flooding as in sulfate fertilizers.

TEChnOLOgy

New biochemical syngas cleaning mechanism



♦ Timely availability: As SulfabactTM contains SOB; there is immediate conversion to sulfate, available for plant uptake.

♦ Dispersive properties: Due to its colloidal size, the sulfur particles in SulfabactTM are dispersed evenly throughout the soil layer and provide efficient supply of nutrient to the soil.

♦ Optimum pH: SulfabactTM is slightly acidic and provides and optimum environment for soil SOB and hence increases conversion efficiency

Innovative Environmental Technologies Pvt. Ltd works in the field of gas cleaning which offers cutting edge technologies through gas scrubbing ranging widely from bio gas cleaning for renewable energy generation to the cleaning of gas obtained from fossil fuel. Innovative offers gas scrubber systems for gas cleaning from various streams such as sour natural gas, syngas, acid gas, tail gas and other unconventional gas streams from fossil fuels containing Hydrogen Sulphide to levels required for various applications such as power generation, chemical manufacture and transformation to liquid fuels. IETL is the leading provider in India of innovative technologies and sustainable end-to-end turnkey solutions for bio-gas cleaning through its Bioskrubber™ for biogas based power generation. "With over 30 projects successfully installed over more than a decade, the Bioskrubber™has its presence at all of the major biogas genset based power generation projects and some natural gas based projects in India," as per Gadgil.

Application in coal sectorThe BioskrubberTM has been used very effectively for over 30 projects on H2S removal from biogas. This technology has a good potential application for small to mid-sized projects for syngas cleaning, where the other conventional sulphur removal systems become unviable or too expensive. The range at which this technology can be very attractive would be for a sulphur removal capacity of up to 40 tons per day. Effectively,

this cleaning technology could be used for coal/petcoke-based syngas for following applications:

♦ Captive CHP plants based on gas turbines where H2S needs to be removed;

♦ Captive power plants based on gas engines; ♦ Small-sized syngas plants on coal gasification for chemical/

fertiliser production; ♦ For coke oven gas cleaning.

The BioskrubberTM plant can be made available on a turnkey basis with a buyback on the sulfur produced.

Other applications of BioskrubberTM

Gas cleaning for BioRenewables: ♦ Biogas Genset Based Power Generation: Generation of

electrical power from biogas is a more profitable option as compared to its application as fuel in the boiler. Also, electricity is easier to transport than steam or heat and supply is easily measured. Biogas can be better employed to generate power directly through Genset& the balance heat can be further recovered as steam, hot water etc.

♦ Bio Methane: Biogas Upgradation technology removes unwanted components of raw Biogas (H2S, CO2) and converts it into BioMethaneTMi.e. upgraded biogas with enriched methane content as in Compressed Natural Gas (CNG).

Gas cleaning for unconventional gas streams/ fossil fuels ♦ Syngas/ Acid Gas/ Tail Gas/Process Gas Cleaning:

Innovative’s cleaning systems can be used for the cleaning of gas streams such as sour natural gas, syngas, acid gas, tail gas and other unconventional gas streams from fossil fuels containing Hydrogen Sulphide such as power generation, chemical manufacture and transformation to liquid fuels.

TEChnOLOgy

For futher information please visit www.ietl.in or write to [email protected]


CORpORATE

JSPL Odisha coal gasification unit by JulyTamajit Pain

JSPL’s integrated steel plant

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd (JSPL), the flagship company of the $10-billion OP Jindal Group, is all set to commence operations at its coal gasification plant at Angul in Odisha

by July 2012, a top company official told Coal Insights.“We expect the Angul project, the first of its kind in India,

to come on stream by June-July. The plant will have a capacity of 80,000 barrels per day (bpd) equivalent of key oil products (such as gasoline),” V.R. Sharma, deputy managing director and CEO of JSPL, said.

Coal gasification is the process that converts coal to synthesis gas by partial oxidation using oxygen and superheated steam as the reactants. The synthesis gas mainly consists of carbon monoxide, hydrogen and methane which will be used as a reducing agent for the iron oxide to produce DRI in the shaft furnace.

The company was earlier expected to commence operation last year, but the work was delayed due to various reasons, including gas pricing issues. Sharma noted that India has been a rather slow-starter to this field of energy, but gradually “coal gassification is becoming viable in this country.”

While being confident of the commercial success of the Angul project, he said the company has planned to come up with similar plants in future. Already, an amount of `50,000 crore has been earmarked for coal to liquid (CTL) projects and the projects would come up by 2017, he added.

Investments In order to expand its presence in steel, power and related sectors, JSPL has earmarked more than `100,000 crore investment in steel, power and coal to liquids projects, company sources said. This investment would come in phases in the next eight years, they said.

A total amount of `45,000 crore has been earmarked for expansion in the steel sector, the sources said, adding that about `15,000 crore has been already invested till date. An amount of `50,000 crore has been earmarked for coal to liquid projects and the projects would come up by 2017, he said. The company has also earmarked `35,000 crore for power sector. Of this `10,000 crore has already been invested.

Apart from this the company is planning to come up with a 4,000-MW hydro power plant in Arunachal Pradesh subject to government support. The total investment for the hydro power project is `24,000 crore.

“We are working closely with the state government. The MoU has been signed and the rehabilitation work has started. We intend to start the project work in near future,” the official said. However, the company is still waiting for the final go ahead from the central government and its assurance regarding security matters.

Commenting on the project, a power industry source said, “There is huge hydro power potential in the northeastern state, estimated at around 50,000 MW. A number of private sector companies, including JSPL and Reliance, have evinced interest in this sector. However, these projects will need active support of the governments. There are security issues and only government can dispel such concerns.”

Net profit Meanwhile, JSPL is expecting to achieve 30 percent growth in net profit in 2011-12 at `3,000 crore, Sharma said.

Asked about the revenue growth, he said the company expects to clock revenues of around `15,000 crore during the current year. The topline growth was around 25 percent in the nine month period ended December 2011.

Earlier, on January 19, the company had reported a 6.6 percent increase in third-quarter group profit aided by a one-time gain and higher demand. Net profit rose to `997 crore in the three months ended December 31 from `935 crore a year earlier.

Total expenses, including raw material costs, for the quarter jumped 58 percent to `295 crore, the company said. Jindal Steel made an exceptional gain of `25.94 crore in the period.

Jindal Steel plans to build a 5 million-ton steel plant and two power plants in Jharkhand. The company, scouting for coal assets overseas to meet requirements for its blast furnace and power plants, will start output at its mine in Mozambique this year.


CORpORATE

Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd (RCF) have joined hands with Coal India Ltd (CIL) to jointly come up with a coal gasification project at Talcher in Angul

district of Odisha. RCF is in the process of setting up the coal based gasification

project in Talcher and CIL will be the equal partner for this project, according to company officials.

The two companies have decided to float a special purpose vehicle (SPV) for the project, which will be completed by the next couple of years. Gail, another public sector unit, may join hands but will not hold any stake.

The overall investment requirement has been estimated at Rs 8,000 crore, including Rs 3,000 crore for upstream and the remaining Rs 5,000 crore for downstream sectors. The proposed plant will have the capacity to produce 2,500 tons per day of ammonia and 3,500 tons per day of urea, the final product. The closed Talcher plant belonged to Fertiliser Corporation of India Ltd (FCIL) and RCF and Coal India will pump in the investments to revive the closed unit.

According to the sources, the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilisers has sent a revival proposal of the plant to the Board of Industrial and Finance Reconstruction (BIFR), which is expected to get approved. The global tender will be invited once the revival proposal is approved by the BIFR, sources said.

It may be noted here that Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had called for the Prime Minister’s intervention to

revive the Talcher fertiliser plant. Production of urea and ammonia has been suspended in the plant from April 1, 1999 due to non-viability of economic operations, according to the FCIL.

The Odisha government has agreed to provide all support for the revival of the plant as the state which accords the highest priority to agriculture is experiencing urea shortage frequently and the demand supply gap for urea has widened over the years.

Further, this plant can build synergy with the Petroleum, Chemicals and Petrochemical Investment Region (PCPIR) which the government of Odisha is developing with the support of the central government.

Meanwhile, RCF is set to sign a fuel supply agreement (FSA) with Coal India Ltd (CIL) for the plant, a senior company official told Coal Insights.

As per the plant requirement, RCF will sign a FSA for supply of 5.5 million tons per annum (mtpa) of E/F grade coal for the next 20 years, the official said. The coal to be supplied should preferably be washed to the level of 35 percent ash content.

Meanwhile, according to RCF, the current urea production in the country is 220 lakh tons per annum and import of urea is 80 lakh tons per annum. By the end of the Twelfth Plan, the consumption of urea will be approximately around 330 lakh tons per annum.

Similarly, the current complex and DAP indigenous production is 125 lakh tons per annum and import is around 85 lakh tons per annum. By the end of the Twelfth Plan the total consumption of the above would be approximately 235 lakh tons per annum. To meet this demand of fertilisers, the most vital input required is ammonia.

Ammonia can be produced through these routes: ♦ Natural gas/naphtha ♦ Fuel oil/LSHS ♦ Coal gasification

RCF, CIL JV to set up coal gasification unit at Talcher


Energy consumption for ammonia production(2500 TPD Ammonia)

Sl. no. Feed Syngas Process routeEnergy, gcal/MT

relative Factor

1 N.G Reforming 7.0 1.02 Naphtha Reforming 7.7 1.13 Fuel Oil Partial Oxidation 8.05 1.154 Coal FBDBGasification 10.0 1.45

Srikant Jena, Union Minister of State for Chemicals and Fertilisers


CORpORATE

Due to limited availability of feedstock gas, high price of gas and consequent marginal viability no major projects have fructified. The gas production projections from KG Basin are also not very encouraging.

Although EGoM has decided that feedstock gas requirement will be met once the

plant is set up, however, no major plants have come up in last 10 years. Further volatility of gas prices and future projections of $14 to $18 per mmBtu is a big retardant. All this leads to sourcing of feedstock from alternate sources like coal.

India has large reserves of coal – 246 billion tons as compared to 728 million tons of crude oil and 686 billion cubic meters of natural gas.

Moreover, coal meets 60 percent of commercial energy needs and 70 percent of power is produced through coal based thermal power stations. Also, coal gasification plants are successfully operating in countries like South Africa, China, USA, Netherlands etc. due to cost competitiveness with that of natural gas feedstock. In China, 70 percent of ammonia production is through coal gasification. Cost of production of ammonia through this route is less by around 20 to 30 percent compared to natural gas.

The coal gasification technologies used are: ♦ Fixed bed – Lurgi; ♦ Fluidised bed –Winkler; and ♦ Entrained flow – Shell, Texaco, Kopper-Totzek.

In the wake of shortage of urea in the country, the government has planned to revive five closed fertiliser units. A study was carried out for setting up fertiliser unit through coal gasification. The findings showed good viability and the units at Talcher, Ramagundam, Sindri and Durgapur are near to coal mines and pit heads. This is an advantage if coal based technology is chosen.

There are challenges for coal gasification in India like handling of huge quantities of ash, environmental issues, cost competitiveness with respect to capital cost and operating cost and reliability. But solutions are also there like coal gasification technology suppliers are ready to undertake ammonia-urea project on Build Own & Operate (BOO) basis and this will reduce capital investment by the owner and transfer risk to BOO agency.

The environmental issues of very low fly ash and bottom ash in the form of solidified slag can be solved with solutions like washing/blending for tackling problems related to high ash content.

Thus, in view of gas price volatility, it is better to have deterministic price of feedstock. This can be done in the case of indigenous coal. This shows that coal gasification has a promising future in the Indian fertiliser industry as new and reliable technologies have developed suitable to high ash content coal. Thus, considering the large reserves of coal, India must explore the coal gasification route for production of fertilisers as well as chemicals


CORpORATE

Tyre maker BKT, a leader in the segment of off highway tyres, has set aggressive plans for the year 2012.

The company is targeting to increase production by 32 percent. This would include the continuously upgraded capacities from its three existing plants as well as partial contribution from the Bhuj plant.

It is also targeting that the new Bhuj plant will contribute around 20 percent of the total production for 2012. With the help

BKT plans 32% hike in productionCoal Insights Bureau


CORpORATE

of the work done by the project team, the company plans to pre-pone commercial production coming out of the Bhuj plant by at least a quarter, to the second quarter of the current calendar.

By 2014, BKT is aiming to emerge as a global leader, garnering 10 percent share in the global off-highway tyre market. This, according to managing director Arvind Poddar, will be helped by India’s largest and most modern off-highway tyre plant that BKT is setting up at Bhuj in Gujarat.

With an objective of 35 percent year on year growth, BKT is continuing its momentum for the next decade. In 2011, despite the various capacity constraints, BKT has achieved an increase of 20 percent in terms of output tonnage. The company plans to close the financial year 2011-12 with a sales volume growth of 40 percent.

At a time when the Indian miners lament the dearth of local-made heavy mining machineries, Mumbai-based BKT is rolling out an ambitious plan to emerge as a global leader in the off-highway tyre segment. BKT is part of the well-diversified Indian conglomerate Siyaram-Poddar Group having presence in textiles, garments, chemicals, paper and tyres with sales in excess of $800 million.

Founded by Dharaprasad Poddar, the current group chairman, and late Mahabirprasad Poddar, the founder chairman, the group began its operations as textile trading house, in 1951 and grew steadily by diversifying into other business sectors.

The group ventured into tyres in the year 1988 by setting up Balkrishna Tyres (BKT), manufacturing two-three wheeler tyres. However, the real success story of BKT began in 1995, when it ventured into production of off-highway tyres. With complete focus on intensive market research, in-depth product knowledge and excellent product development capabilities, BKT has already made its mark in the off-highway tyres segment and is continuously evolving to achieve a greater footprint in this niche segment.

Today, the tyre segment contributes more than half of overall Group turnover, with a global sales of `2,200 crore (around $415 million). The segmental revenue is expected to grow up to `2,800 crore in 2011-12 (around $528 million). By 2014, BKT aims to increase the global tyre business turnover to $1 billion.

The company’s mid-term goal is to emerge as a global leader in off-highway tyre solutions market. For this the company needs to garner 10 percent market share by 2014 (current share is around 3 percent). In order to do that, the company will maintain its superior quality off-highway tyres, backed by advanced technology and rigorous quality control for complete customer satisfaction, as per company information.

Plant expansionCurrently, BKT has three state-of-the-art tyre manufacturing units located in northern and western provinces of India. Two of these units are in Rajasthan and the remaining in Maharashtra. A fourth tyre manufacturing plant is coming up at Bhuj in the western state of Gujarat, very near to the port of Mundra.

While most of the machinery for the new tyre plant at Bhuj is already in the commissioning mode, a part of the plant has already started “tube production” from December onwards. With the full range of tubes going to be available for various


off highway tyres, this would serve the regular needs of the distribution partners.

All plants put together, the company will produce a vast range of around 1,900 SKUS (Stock Keeping Units), company insiders informed.

The machines are modern, efficiently producing tyres as per international standards and satisfying the varied needs of the consumers. From efficient compound mixing machines to the best in class curing presses, to the high cost and renowned tyre building machines, BKT plants are fully equipped with the most modern machinery and are very well maintained to get the optimum output in terms of quality and quantity, they added.

BKT tyres can effectively handle multiple mould changes and manage more than 40 compounds everyday. Consistency in tyre quality is the result of more than 450 checks, which every tyre in the manufacturing process goes through.

CORpORATE

BKT’s unique off-highway tyres include:

♦ Agricultural tyres (Cross ply & Radial)

♦ Industrial and Construction tyres (Cross ply & Radial)

♦ OTR Tyres (Cross ply & Radial)

♦ Other special application tyres :

♦ Turf tyres,

♦ ATV

♦ Golf

♦ Go Cart tyres

♦ Military tyres (puncture resistant and run flat)

The major highlight of BKT’s product range is the width and depth of its product range, showing the magnitude as well as diversity:

♦ Small go-kart tyres to gigantic earthmover tyres.

♦ Tyres for rim size from smallest 5” up to largest 54”.

♦ Tyres weighing from 1.7 kg to 1700 kg.

♦ Conventional cross ply tyres to most modern polyester radials, all steel OTR radial, aramide belted (puncture proof) and run flat military application tyres.

♦ Tyres for varied applications from conventional farming to modern and high technology oriented agriculture. From effortless implements to complex GPRS controlled tractors.

♦ Tractor tyres specially designed to carry higher loads at a higher speed on roads and with minimal soil compaction in field.

♦ Mega sizes radial tyres for tractors having over 250 HP engine capabilities.

♦ Scientifically designed and engineered tyres for tankers and wagons.

♦ Tyres for construction, material handling, port applications, mining (underground as well as open cast mines).

♦ Tyre for golf carts used at golf courses and passenger transport at airports.

♦ Tyres for ATV/Quads - from utility to high performance racing tyres. Also available, E-marked ATV tyres for usage on European roads.

BKT’s R&D capabilities ♦ Resources and infrastructure ♦ Dedicated team of engineers for R&D ♦ Dedicated team of engineers for Technical support &

Quality Control ♦ Complete testing equipment for compound

development ♦ 3D Modeling & EDM Process for tyres and moulds ♦ Controlled Laboratory tests ♦ Highly efficient product testing machines ♦ Tie-ups for outdoor testing facilities


Spurred by high demand, the fourth plant at Bhuj will practically double the capacity and facilitate in reducing the tyre lead times. The new plant would be a greenfield project, with ultramodern facilities having advanced technology equipment.

Mould plant BKT’s mould plant near suburban Mumbai in western India offers great flexibility in having faster turnaround times – from the concept to tyre availability in the market. The best-in-class machinery and the 3-D modeling systems offer greater control on the mould/tyre dimensions, as per information from the company.

The mould plant with almost double capacity to produce high quality moulds with state-of-the-art machines was inaugurated in October at Dombivilli near Mumbai. This would be of great importance for rolling tyres from the new Bhuj plant, since timely mould availability is a major step in the process.

Markets & exportsA testimony to BKT’s consistency in offering high-quality specialty tyres is amply demonstrated by the fact that 95 percent of its products are consumed by the overseas markets, of which over 50 percent is sold in technologically advanced Europe. Other major markets for BKT are North America and the Middle East, followed by South America, Africa, Australia and Asia.

With its total dedication to the specialty tyre segment, BKT has also emerged globally as the preferred supplier to major OEMs in construction, agricultural and industrial tyre segments. BKT has established offices in Italy and the US (Ohio Akron) to look after the overseas operations.

“Today, BKT has presence in more than 120 countries across the globe and has the privilege of being the largest tyre exporter out of India,” Poddar said.

Apart from catering to the Indian OEMs, BKT has been a preferred supplier on a global basis to leading OEMs in the agricultural and industrial/construction equipment sectors.

In India, the company is present in the OTR segment, mining, infrastructure, material handling and OEMs. However, the agri tyre segment is not in its current focus in India.

Quality control Quality control is stringently carried out at every stage of manufacturing – starting from the raw material to the finished

CORpORATE

Milestones @ BKT


product ensuring a product of a consistently high quality. State-of-the-art manufacturing tools run by experienced operators allow BKT to manufacture tyres of outstanding quality efficiently and cost effectively. All BKT plants are ISO 9000 and IS0 14000 certified and that reflects in the plant efficiency.

In order to ensure high standard of quality, BKT has set up a sophisticated test centre with modern equipment, including those that are used for endurance-testing. Besides in-house testing, BKT regularly conducts tests under international regulations outside India as well.

R&D and technologyBKT’s R&D centre, set up in plant locations, is capable of developing various types of rubber compounds required for manufacturing tyres for varied applications.

BKT is also associated with European testing facilities to ensure that its products perform to demanding stringent applications.

Eco-friendly approachBKT has consistently made efforts to reduce its carbon footprint and uphold its strongest belief – “Environment protection at all costs”. The company is committed to social causes as well as to protecting the environment. A large part of BKT’s energy requirement is fulfilled through non-conventional and renewable energy sources, where BKT has invested rationally, a senior company official informed.

BKT strongly believes in “Green World” cause and ensures

environment friendly steps at all plants. The following bear out

its dedication to the cause: ♦ All the three

plants’ outputs are in compliance with European Directive “REACH”, as of November 2009.

♦ ‘Green Power’ is generated through the windmill established by BKT in the northern state of Rajasthan.

♦ E n e r g y conservation is on the top of the agenda, with a belief that “power saved is power generated”.

New product development & brandingAccording to Poddar, BKT has always been in the forefront to adopt new generation technologies in tyre manufacturing as well as on the raw material front.It has been proactive in tandem with its equipment suppliers to modify the equipment, making them best-suited for production. Equipment is selected from the best available source.

Similarly, all the raw materials at BKT are sourced from top quality suppliers with whom BKT has enjoyed an excellent relationship for many years. This ensures a continuous supply with consistent quality.

With regard to new product development, BKT develops 150-160 new SKUs every year. This continuous development is the basis for the vast product range available from BKT, and offers a wide range to choose from.

“Another unique feature of BKT’s product range is variety,” said Poddar. “BKT has tyres available from the smallest 5” Go-Kart tyres to the largest 51” Mining tyres and thus catering to the diversified market segments,” he said.

As for branding the products, consistent efforts over the years have resulted in creating a strong awareness of BKT. Today brand BKT has emerged as a symbol of trust, excellence and genuineness as shown in its prior tag line: “CONFIDENCE REINFORCED!”

“Growing together is our new tagline, strengthening the new corporate identity at every stage. BKT is firmly committed to this aim of being perceived as a company where people and machines share a strong professional fellowship,” Poddar said.

CORpORATE


In this issue, we will examine whether it was a good idea to have allocated coal blocks to

companies other than CIL.In order to do that, we first

need to take a close look at the overall energy scenario in India, where 70 percent of the electricity is produced from coal and thus evidently coal has a huge role in the energy security of India. Out of

the total 771,173 million units of power, 539,251 million units are being produced from coal.

The country’s demand for coal for the year 2011-12 is 713.24 million tons (mt) but the production is likely to stand at only 629.91 mt or less and therefore the shortfall will be 83.33 mt or more, which has to be imported. Can India achieve even this modest target of 629.91 mt, is the question.

The shortfall in coal supply may touch 269 mtby 2021-22, from the current level of around 80 mt as domestic producers fail to keep up with the growing demand for the commodity. The demand for coal in 2021-22 is projected to be around 1,353 mt against the production assessment of 1084 mt, resulting in a shortfall of 269 mt, the coal minister, Sriprakash Jaiswal, said recently.

The issue here is that the huge quantum of import that the country will have to depend on. The cost of importing nearly 270 mt of coal will be around `1.08 lakh crore at a rate of nearly `4,000 per ton or more. To handle such large quantity of import, India has to build port, rail and road infrastructure, which may cost another `10 lakh crore. Potentially this could cripple India’s economy.

Captive blocks allocationWhen the demand of coal in the country outpaced the growth capabilities of CIL (including SCCL), the Ministry of Coal took a policy decision in 1993 to allocate coal blocks to non-CIL companies, both in the private and public sectors, for developing coal projects for “captive use” of coal in power, steel and cement sectors. This decision was welcomed for sustaining the economic growth of the country, particularly for the growth of the energy sector.

There were certain factors which had prompted the government to take this decision. In spite of the spectacular growth of the coal sector after nationalisation of the coalmines

of the country in 1972-73, later CIL and its subsidiary companies were not able to cope with the ever increasing demand-supply gap in coal requirement of the country, particularly in the energy sector. In the present era of global competition, it was not desirable that the country should continue to encourage government monopoly in the coal sector by relying on one government company, CIL, for its entire indigenous coal requirement. India is bestowed with a huge reserve of 285 billion tons of coal (latest figure by GSI) and multiple agencies, both in the public and private sectors, should be given the scope to develop the huge coal reserves to meet the increased requirement of coal.

In an assessment by the Planning Commission, the requirement of coal by the terminal year of the Twelfth Plan period (i.e. in 2016-17) would be 1,125 million tons (mt). The indigenous production of coal in the country is now stagnating at the level of 550 mt per year. Hence, the decision of the Ministry of Coal to allocate coal blocks to non-CIL companies was definitely a timely step in the right direction. It has already allocated 213 coal blocks, with a total reserve of 49,641 mt of coal, to various non-CIL companies both in the public and private sectors.

Current status of blocksAlthough more than 15 years have passed since the coal ministry started allocating coal blocks in 1994, only 28 blocks which are located near already existing infrastructural facilities for rail-road connectivity, have come to production stage, giving a total production of only 35 mt of coal in 2010-11. From this poor progress in development of the allocated coal blocks, it is evident that the very objective of overall increase in the coal production capacity of the country has not been achieved up to the desired level so far.

There are some serious problems now being faced by CIL companies and also by non-CIL companies in the development of new coal blocks. They are the rigid, unhelpful and non-cooperative attitude of the MoEF in granting “statutory clearances” for the new coal projects. The controversy of “Go” and “no-go” areas has also resulted in abnormal delay.

Coal is our main source of energy and our coal requirement by 2030 is likely to be nearly 2,500 mt or more. And with the present production level of 550 mt, India has a long way to go as 90 percent of all future projects are facing forest clearance problems. The ministry has to take a decision regarding “go” and “no-go” projects. The coal occurrence is site specific and

Allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL companies a national blunder?

J.P. Panda

ExpERT spEAk


ExpERT spEAk

most of it is under forest cover. Do we stop mining altogether or do we start a fresh initiative of dynamic afforestation is something that has to be decided.

Advance dynamic afforestaion has to be done in barren areas to compensate for the coal bearing area loss of forest. In other words, we have to create forests in barren areas as a compensatory measure to replenish the depleted forest cover. It may be noted that it takes 40 years to create a forest but coal seams occur only in trillions of years and are site specific.

The recent spate of unrest in different parts of India about land acquisition has resulted in abnormal delay in land procurement. The demand for employment has been most important demand of land losers which has not been fulfilled by the coal block allocates.

Apart from these major issues, there are other problems as well, all of them equally important. The first among them is poor or no infrastructure. No integrated and comprehensive planning has been done for development of coal blocks in the greenfield areas of the coalfields. Before 1994, when the ministry of coal started allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL companies, all coal projects in the country used to be planned and developed by only one government agency, CIL, except of course, some coalmines of SCCL and a few captive coalmines of TISCO, IISCO etc. Normally, subsidiary coal companies of CIL prepare their plans to develop the coal blocks in contiguous groups or clusters, the new coal blocks being adjacent to the already existing and working ones. This process of “sequential mining” of the coal blocks helps the coal companies of CIL to plan and develop new coal blocks by partially utilising the existing infrastructural facilities of the adjacent working coal projects and subsequently extending the additional infrastructural facilities to the new coal blocks.

For operational convenience of the coal projects of CIL companies, a conscious and correct decision had been taken by the ministry of coal to allocate new and virgin coal blocks to non-CIL companies, geographically away from the area of operation of CIL companies. As a result, almost all the allocated coal blocks are located in greenfield areas, where no infrastructural facilities, not even any rail-road connectivity, exist for development of new coal blocks. As the coal blocks allocated to non-CIL companies are not within the area of operation of CIL, naturally such coal-blocks are not covered within the ambit of future planning by CIL or CMPDI.

Without advanced, comprehensive and macro-level planning, it is not at all possible to develop the coal blocks allocated to a large number of independent companies in greenfield areas. Only a few of the allocated blocks, which are located near existing infrastructural facilities, with rail-road connectivity, can be developed for production. But the majority of them cannot be brought to production stage without any comprehensive and macro-level planning for the greenfield areas of the coalfields.

The second problem is that of fragmentation of the coal reserves into small and medium size coal blocks and allocation of the fragmented coal blocks to a large number of independent companies.

The objective behind the decision of allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL companies was not to create a handful favoured industrial units (power plants, sponge iron/steel plants and cement plants) by allocating them coal blocks and ensuring their coal-availability at a much less cost in comparison to their majority counterparts who do not have coal blocks. The objective of allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL companies was to substantially increase the overall coal production capacity in the country. This objective could have been achieved more effectively if large chunks of coal reserves in greenfield areas (say, at least 5,000 to 10,000 mt) would have been allocated to non-CIL companies both in the private and public sectors, with proven records of capability for long-term planning and investment. Such allocate-companies could have produced coal from high-capacity coal projects (25 to 50 mtpa capacity) to be developed from the allocated coal blocks and ensured coal supplies to the coal- consuming industrial units as per the guidelines and coal distribution policies of the ministry of coal, in the same way as the coal companies of CIL are now producing and supplying coal in the country. This system of allocation could not have created groups of coal-consuming industrial units; one small “favoured” group with allocated coal blocks and the other majority group without any coal blocks allocated to them. In that case, all the major coal-consuming industrial units in the country could operate on a “level-playing field”.

But, in order to satisfy a higher number of applicant companies, the coal reserves in a coalfield were fragmented into small and medium size coal blocks and allocated to a large number of companies, both in the private and public sectors. These small & medium size coal-blocks are not suitable for planning modern, high-capacity coal-projects.

There are possibilities of greater loss of coal reserves in such small-size coal blocks. The reason is that sub-dividing them into small blocks, results in mining loss of around 30-40 percent of the reserves due to coal loss in barriers, safety zone and maintaining angle of repose etc. Can India afford to lose such a huge resource of nearly 40 percent due to mining loss?

The allocattee companies of these small and medium size coal blocks do not have the professional competence and capacity for long-term planning and investment for the coal projects.

Their basic objective and priority are to run their existing plants (i.e. sponge iron plants and associated captive power plants, cement plants etc). It is quite likely that such coal block allocattees would indulge in “selective mining”, without any concern for conservation of the “difficult-to- mine” coal-seams or deep-seated coal-seams.

Another factor is the lack of adequate exploration


capacity in the country. In order to satisfy more number of applicantcompanies, the ministry of coal has allocated many coalblocks without detailed geological exploration.

The available capacity in the country for undertaking detailed exploration of the coal reserves is highly inadequate. Knowing this well, the ministry of coal should have taken steps to engage suitable international agencies to undertake detailed exploration of the country’s geological reserves, in collaboration with G.S.I., CMPDI and MEC etc. But, in order to satisfy more number of applicants, the ministry allocated many unexplored coal blocks in haste, even without detailed exploration.

Now, for detailed exploration of the allocated coal blocks, the individual allocattee companies are compelled to engage some “agencies”, whose credibility and reliability for undertaking such highly technical assignments are doubtful. It is neither practicable nor economically viable for the individual allocattee companies to engage suitable outside international agencies for undertaking detailed exploration of individual coal-blocks.

Allocation of coal blocks to a large number of smaller companies and lack of any platform or forum for bringing them together under one umbrella is also a huge problem.

The coal companies of CIL undertake construction of infrastructural facilities, which are common for a group of adjacent coal blocks viz. railway siding, approach road, water supply system, electricity supply, residential colony etc. They have to make heavy investments for planned development of the required infrastructural facilities.

But, except a few, the majority of the allocattee companies are small companies both in the private and public sectors, who do not have either the competence or the capability to develop the required infrastructural facilities for the coal projects. These allocattee companies are independent companies with diverse objectives and diverse priorities. It is neither practicable nor commercially viable for each of them to independently make investments for constructing the required infrastructural facilities (viz. rail-connectivity from the main-line of Indian rail network up to their allocated coal block.

Left to themselves, these companies cannot develop any common forum or syndicate for planning and executing common infrastructural facilities, which can serve a group of coal-blocks.

The ministry of coal, which is the Administrative Wing of the Central government for the coal sector of the country, does not consider it its obligation to ensure that some institution or some mechanism is developed to bring together these small and medium allocattee companies for planning and execution of the required common infrastructural facilities.

The coal ministry, instead of analysing the ground realities responsible for such abnormal delay in development of the allocated coal-blocks and instead of taking necessary corrective measures, simply conducts occasional review meetings

and threatens the allocattee companies with cancelling the allocations for delay in achieving the so-called “milestones” of development of the coal projects.

ConclusionBefore 1972-1973, before nationalisation of the coalmines in the country, most of the coal mines in India except a few of the then government company N.C.D.C., were in the hands of small private sector companies. Most of these coal-mine-owners were indulging in so-called “rat-hole” mining, with scant regard for safety in mines, conservation of coal, scientific development of the coal reserves, long-term planning and investment for growth of coal industry in the country or welfare of the labour-force engaged in coal mines.

The country had taken a bold step in nationalising the coal mines in 1972 and 1973, as a result of which the coal industry of the country was revamped and the coal production capacity of the country could increased substantially, by long-term planning, investment and scientific development of coal reserves.

But the manner in which the coal ministry has allocated the coal blocks 1994 onwards, with the sole objective of satisfying more number of applicants, without any comprehensive planning, the benefits of nationalisation are likely to be negated. The very objective of substantial increase in coal production cannot be achieved simply due the faulty manner of allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL companies.

For example, the Talcher Coalfields is one of the ideal locations for mega projects. The coalfield covers an area of 1860 sq km with coal bearing area of 1000 sq km, is almost rectangular shaped measuring 80 km along the strike and 26 km along the dip. The coal occurs in the Karharbari and Barakar formations in seams from I, II, III, VIII and IX seams, many of which are all thick seams with large scale opencast prospects.

The coalfield is mostly located in the Angul district of Orissa. This is the biggest coalfield in India with most of the coal available in shallow depth and quarriable. The present production is being utilised by NALCO, APGENCO, TNEB, NTPC and Karnataka Electricity Board for power generation.

The production programme envisaged for the coalfield by CMPDIL is 90.97 mt in 2011-12, 237.32 mt for 2016-17 and 348.88 mt for 2016-17. But how will such an ambitious production programme be achieved unless the whole infrastructure of evacuation is built up?

Can the Railways, presently carrying approximately 400 mt for the whole country, increase its infrastructure within 10 years so as to carry nearly 350mt of coal from a single coalfield to long distance destinations like Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat?

Who will build the infrastructure for all the small and medium coal blocks which has been allocated by the ministry? All indications point to the fact that even if coal is produced

ExpERT spEAk


within 2-3 years time, it cannot be evacuated. It is indeed a sad commentary for this country’s infrastructure.

Without building infrastructure in advance, it appears that the allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL companies is a national blunder. What corrective steps can be taken now at this stage?

Some suggestionsDetailed exploration of the unexplored coal reserves of the country should be undertaken by the Central government by engaging reputed international exploration agencies under the guidance of GSI and CMPDI.

Integrated Comprehensive Master Plans should be prepared for each coalfield, particularly for all the major coalfields in the country. In this endeavor, CMPDI, as the nodal planning agency of the country, should also associate world-class planners and developers of coal projects available in other advanced countries. Mega project planning should include infrastructure planning of the whole coalfield/coal basin or the mega coal mine, involving the Planning Commission, ministry of coal, ministry of railways, ministry of power and ministry of environment. The coal controller funds by way of cess collected from the mine owners must be utilised for the development of infrastructure.

All coal mega projects should be treated at par with UMPPs of the power sector. A single window clearance should be aimed for all the mega projects. Comprehensive mine planning including R & R package and mine closure plan can be sanctioned at one go. New and modern townships can be built to settle the PAPs (Project Affected People) and employment opportunities can be created by building skill development centres.

The coal ministry and the concerned state government should jointly set up one organisation, say, the Coal Development Authority, for each of the major coal-bearing states of the country. This organization should be vested with powers for infrastructure development of new coal blocks by non-CIL companies.

All the coal blocks, which contain low-grade non-coking coal, suitable for thermal power generation, should be amalgamated and re-grouped by CMPDI into large-size coal blocks with each block having a geological reserve of more than 5,000 mt of coal so that high-capacity (20 to 50 mtpa) coal mega-projects can be developed.

Advantages of mega projects ♦ The time taken for all clearances, like environment and

forests, is the same as that of small projects; ♦ The infrastructure such as rail, road etc. can be planned

much in advance; ♦ The mechanisation level can be very high and manpower

requirement will be much less; ♦ The environment management can be managed by a highly

skilled team and indeed zero pollution level can be easily done and maintained;

♦ The backfilling and post mining restoration of ecology or the mine closure plan can be done in a much better way;

♦ The CSR (corporate social responsibility) and other needs of local population can be met due to higher profit;

♦ Coal beneficiation can be done and cleaner coal can be transported long distances and rejects can be used for in-pit power generation and supply power to national grid;

♦ Draglines of 122 m3 bucket capacity with 128 m boom length, rope shovels of up to 63 m3 capacity, hydraulic shovels with 50 m3 bucket capacity and dumpers with 360 to 400 t payload and dozers up to 860 HP are the maximum sizes of HEMMs available worldwide. Coal India has already procured and inducted 42 Cum shovel and 240 ton dumpers at Gevra OCP producing currently 35 mt that is likely to go up to 50 mt. This can be a huge advantage with regard to mega projects.

The small and medium size coal blocks, which have been already allocated by the ministry of coal, should be amalgamated to constitute large-size coal blocks (with geological reserve of more than 1,000 million tons of coal) for facilitating formation of high-capacity coal projects. However, to protect the interests of the companies who had already been allocated the small and medium size coal blocks, they should be assured of supply of coal from the newly constituted large-size coal projects. Their coal supplies may be in proportion to the geological coal reserves already allocated to them by the ministry of coal. The details of modalities of formation of companies for developing and operating the high-capacity coal projects may be worked out jointly by the companies who have been allocated these small and medium size coal blocks.

All public sector companies of state governments, especially the electricity boards, should jointly develop infrastructure for long distance rail transport. Alternately they should jointly wash the coal and beneficiated coal should be transported hydraulically by pipe line to their destinations for power generation.

Separate guidelines can be formed for development of high-grade non-coking coals and coking coals in underground mines. The organisation or the Coal Development Authority can work as the facilitator and frame the guidelines.

The basic objective is to bridge the demand-supply gap in coal by scientifically developing the available coal reserves of the country in a planned and sustainable manner, with minimum land acquisition, minimum R&R problems and minimum environmental degradation.

(The author is managing director of Priya Mining Consultancy and Services Ltd, which provides consultancy on both underground and opencast coal mines, including EMP-EIA, forest clearance etc. The company has also produced CDs on a wide variety of subjects including all DGMS circulars from 1957 till December 2010, a history of disasters in coal mines for the last 100 years and safety and productivity improvement in both opencast and underground mining. The author can be contacted at [email protected].)

ExpERT spEAk


Standing on the brink of a new financial year, India’s coal community looks both positive and concerned about the future of this all important dry fuel that may make

or mar the country’s growth story. As in any formal forum, stakeholders of the coal industry raised their voice on ICMW over issues plaguing the sector and also offered suggestions to address the same.

Post-budget, the discussions hovered around the measures announced, especially the duty cut on steam coal imports. The other issues that were brought into focus included the growing demand-supply gap, introduction of a coal regulator and policy issues.

Duty cut on importsThe removal of 5 percent customs duty on non-coking coal in the budget 2012-13 has been a welcome step to induce more coal imports into the country. The exemption will result into increase in imports of non-coking coal by around 1 million ton (mt) as the prices of imports would come down, industry experts said.

There was little doubt that the power sector, the major consumers of non-coking coal, would be significantly benefitted by this move, they said. Incidentally, nearly two-third of the electricity generation in the country is based on coal.

However, in case of domestic coal, the coal Railway freight charges having increased by 22 to 26 percent in March 2012, prices of coal is expected to increase overall by 14 percent, said Vinay Sinha, Joint Managing Director at Gupta Corporation.

Call for a regulator After much dilly dally, the coal ministry has recently disclosed that the coal sector would soon get a regulator as the government has finalised a draft bill for the purpose. But that seems too little to pacify the angst of the industry that often found government actions falling short of their expectations.

Reacting to the news, Sameer Kulkarni, official of ThyssenKrupp Industries India Private Limited said, “It’s good that there will be regulator finally but only time tell how effective initiative will be. Any way policies as such in India are good only on paper....Let’s keep our fingers crossed and let’s hope for something good for the power sector.”

UG miningDevelopment of underground (UG) mines is the only way forward to meet the future coal needs of the country as the reserves available for open cast mining would be exhausted in the next 30 years or so, suggested some members on the online forum.

The country, they pointed out, would soon require an additional supply of over 200 mt of coal. This would be the “bare minimum” to add an additional coal-fired generation capacity of say 45,000 MW under the Twelfth Plan target. In fact, this would just about meet the power sector needs.

Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL) was focusing on development of underground mines with 30 such new projects currently in exploratory stage. The company has proposed a capital expenditure of close to `11,000 crore in the Twelfth Plan, of which `7,000 crore would go into a 1,000-MW power project using the residual reserves of abandoned coal mines. Similarly, Coal India Limited (CIL) is required to focus on UG mining more in order to ramp up coal production in the coming years, they noted.

CIL’s land acquisitionUnder pressure to ramp up production, CIL has sweetened its offers for land acquisition. The new rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) policy was recently approved by the CIL board. The members at ICMW were divided in their opinion about this development.

The reports said that the Indian miner will now offer `500,000 per acre to farmers as “compensation” to loss of livelihood with options of annuity income. The compensation, however, will not be available if the land loser opts for employment in CIL. According to the previous policy, however, the coal major offered price for land and one job for land holding in excess of two acres. The additional compensation will therefore be of help particularly to the small farmers (owning less than 2 acres), who miss the employment opportunities.

Concern over India’s coal futureCoal Insights Bureau

sOCIAL buzz

Coal Insights has recently started a group on LinkedIn called India Coal Market Watch (ICMW). The readers are welcome to join the group and participate in daily conversations and surveys conducted by ICMW on the online forum. Coal Insights may, at its discretion, publish the result of such surveys and discussions for the benefit of a larger audience.


Source: EIA

US coal production(million short tons)

InTERnATIOnAL

US coal consumption, production to decline in 2012: EIA


The Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the US has estimated that US coal consumption for 2012 will fall to 961.9 million short tons (million s.t) in 2012 from

1003.2 million s.t in 2011 in its March 2012 report. The agency, which is an independent statistical

organisation within the US Department of Energy, further said coal production will also decline to 1041.3 million s.t from 1089.2 million s.t in 2011.

EIA estimates that electric power sector coal consumption is forecast to decline by nearly 5 percent in 2012 to 883.9 million s.t. This is so because generation from natural gas, nuclear, and wind are likely to increase.

EIA expects that electric power sector coal consumption will increase by 1.9 percent to 900.9 million s.t in 2013 as the economic competitiveness of coal-fired generation improves. In 2011, coal consumption by this sector stood at 928.6 million s.t.


The EIA in its March report has also estimated that coal consumption in retail and other industry would slow down to 51.9 million s.t in 2012 as compared to 52.4 million s.t in 2011. In 2013, they are projected to show some improvement to 53.1 million s.t.

However, coal consumption by coke plants is estimated to improve to 26.1 million s.t in 2012 as compared to 22.3 million s.t in 2011 as per the latest report. In 2013, consumption in this sector is expected to soar further to 26.6 million s.t.

EIA expects coal production to decline by 4.4 percent in 2012 as domestic consumption and exports fall. EIA projects that secondary inventories will rise in 2012, but decline in the following year, primarily in the electric power sector, as consumption grows. This will increase coal production to 1044 million s.t in 2013.

Electricity demandEIA expects that total US consumption of electricity will fall slightly during 2012, and then grow by 1.9 percent during 2013. As per the agency’s latest report, US electricity consumption will fall to 10.55 billion kilowatthours per day in 2012 from 10.57 billion kilowatthours per day in 2011. It will however rise to 10.75 billion kilowatthours per day in 2013.

Growth in retail sales of electricity to the commercial and industrial sectors during 2012 of 0.7 percent and 0.8 percent, respectively, will be offset by a 2.1 percent decline in residential sector consumption. Retail sale of electricity will fall to 10.17 kilowatthours per day from 10.21 kilowatthours per day in 2011. In 2013 it will grow to 10.37 kilowatthours per day.

Residential consumption falls this year as a result of milder weather compared with last year. EIA estimates that US residential electricity consumption during January and

February was about 9 percent lower than during the same months of 2011, primarily because of the 17 percent decline in heating degree days nationwide.

Oil consumptionWorld liquid fuels consumption grew by an estimated 0.8 million bbl/d to 87.9 million bbl/d in 2011. EIA expects that this growth will accelerate over the next two years, with consumption reaching 89.0 million bbl/d in 2012 and 90.3 million bbl/d in 2013. World liquid fuels consumption grows by an annual average of 1.1 million barrels per day (bbl/d) in 2012 and 1.4 million bbl/d in 2013.

Non-OECD countries will account for essentially all of the world’s consumption growth over the next two years, with the largest contributions coming from China, the Middle

East, and Central and South America. EIA expects increases in global consumption to outpace

production growth in countries outside of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) during the forecast period. Supply from non-OPEC countries increases by 0.7 million bbl/d in 2012 and by 0.8 million bbl/d in 2013.

EIA expects that the market will rely on both inventories and increases in crude oil and non crude liquids production from OPEC members to meet world demand growth.

TradeOn the export front, the agency said that US coal export is expected to remain strong but below the 107 million s.t exported in 2011. In 2012 US coal exports are likely to be at 98.7 million s.t. Forecast US coal exports are estimated to be at 98.5 million s.t in 2013. US coal exports averaged 56 MMst in the decade preceding 2011.

EIA’s most recent report, however, suggests that US coal import is likely to get better in 2012 as compared to the year before. US coal imports stood at 13.1 million s.t in 2011 as compared to 14.5 estimated in 2012. In 2013, coal imports are forecast to rise further to 15.7 million s.t.

InTERnATIOnAL

Source: EIA

US coal consumption(million short tons)

For Classified Advertisementscontact

Sumit Jalan, +91 91633 48243or [email protected]


InTERnATIOnAL

New coking coal mines coming up in countries like Mozambique and Australia would lead to increased exports of the material to Asian countries in coming

years. The higher exports, according to market sources, would benefit the Indian steelmakers who were likely to face raw material constraints, going forward.

The major development is reported from Mozambique, where Vale S.A., a Brazilian miner and the world’s second largest mining company, has started exporting coal from its new Moatize coking coal mine. Recently, the company exported 35,000 tons of Moatize coal to the Asian markets from the port of Beira by Panamax vessels.

Moatize coal mine is a large-scale surface coal mine located 1,700 km north of Maputo in the Tete Province. Vale started producing coal from this mine in mid 2011. The development at this coal mine has two stages. The Stage-I will come to completion in 2013 with total production of 11.0 million tons per annum (mtpa) of salable coal. This will include 8.5 mt of hard coking coal and 2.5 mt of thermal coal.

The Stage-II is expected to be completed in 2014, when the production of salable coal will be doubled to 22.0 mtpa. Of this, the production of hard coking coal would be 17 mtpa while that of thermal coal would be 5 mtpa.

Meanwhile, in 2011, Moatize coal mine produced a total of 617,000 tons of coal, including 275,000 tons of hard coking coal and 342,000 tons of thermal coal. Vale commenced coal export from Moatize coal mine in September, 2011 and exported a total of 170,000 tons of coal in 2011. Although the major export

item is thermal coal up to now, the full-scale export of hard coking coal will start in March.

According to market sources, the major portion of exports from the mine would be catered to Asian markets. This is so as three major Asian importers of coking coal, namely China, Japan and India, together account for around 62 percent of the global coking coal trade as of 2011. Analysts said the share of these three importers in total imports would rise even further in the years to come. Among them, India is likely to see the fastest growth in coking coal imports. The country has chalked out a robust growth path for its steel industry but lacks any decent reserves of coking coal, a primary raw material for steelmaking.

However, the logistics constraints in exporting countries may restrict exports to these markets. As for Vale, coal produced at the Moatize coal mine are to be exported from the port of Beira for the time being. However, going by the coal shipping capacity at this port and the railing capacity of Sena Railway, the maximum quantity that can be exported from this port will be 6.0 mtpa.

Also, the depth at the water route is shallow at the port of Beira; hence the coal loading on to the vessel has to be done off the coast in order to have the Panamax and Capesize vessels fully loaded. This is why Vale could ship only 35,000 tons by a Panamax vessel this time round.

In view of the port constraints at Beira, Vale is going to export hard coking coal from Moatize coal mine through the port of Nacala as well. This port is located in the northeastern

New coking coal mines to benefit Indian market



InTERnATIOnAL

part of Mozambique and can accommodate Panamax as well as Capesize vessels.

Top met coal seaborne exporters

Country 2008 2010 2020

Australia 134.3 158.8 255.0

US 35.3 47.8 25.0

Canada 25.4 27.0 50.0

Others 25.6 30.5 85.0*

Total 220.6 264.1 415.0

*Including: Colombia, Russia, Indonesia, Mongolia, New Zealand and Mozambique

Top seaborne met coal importersCountry 2008 2010 2020

Japan 66.5 62.6 71.0China 6.9 53.0 110.0India 26.8 37.2 90.0South Korea 21.9 18.4 38.0Brazil 17.9 18.4 38.0Others 81.0 66.3 75.0Total 221.0 260.7 415.0

Source: Merlintrade & Consultancy Ltd

Exports from Australia to riseMeanwhile, the Australian mining sector is targeting to increase its exports to India for both coking and thermal coal produced at its mines. According to a new study by Reserve Bank of Australia’s economic panel, India is the world’s fourth-largest steel producer but relative to the size of its economy the country’s steel consumption is low.

“As the [Indian] economy develops further, steel consumption is likely to increase. Indian steel makers have plans to expand capacity substantially in order to meet the anticipated increase in demand….While India has relatively large reserves of iron ore, its steel makers import most of the coking coal they require. As Australia is a major supplier of coking coal to India, these exports from Australia are likely to expand further,” the report which was done by Markus Hyvonen and Sean Langcake said.

India is the third-largest importer of coking coal and has

become the second most important destination for Australian coking coal behind Japan. Almost 85 percent of India’s coking coal imports, which is estimated at around 30 mt, comes from Australia.

The coal exporting capacity of the country is likely to increase further in coming years with the government giving approvals for new mine developments. Recently, the Queensland government has conditionally approved a $4-billion coal mine in the Bowen Basin. The mine is expected to produce 5.5 mtpa of high-quality hard coking coal, with first exports taking place by 2014.

Along with coking coal, Australian miners such as Rio Tinto are planning to capture a significant pie of India’s thermal coal market as well. Although Australian thermal coal comes at a premium, the multinational coal producers in that country are trying to cash in on the excess demand existing in the Indian power sector, market sources said.

This emerging trend followed enquiries from Indian private power utilities for coal purchase deals late last year. Some Indian utilities were looking to procure Australian thermal coal to meet their immediate fuel requirements. Kolkata-based CESC Ltd signed a deal in 2011 to pick up a stake in an Australia-listed mining firm Resource Generation for $10 million. However, the volume of imports is likely to remain restricted due to the high cost factor, the sources said.

Among the large players in the Australian mining sector, Rio Tinto Ltd is looking at the Indian thermal coal market with some definite plans and strategies. The Anglo-Australian firm has so far been selling other mineral resources such as coking coal, alumina, borates and rough diamonds to the Indian companies. In 2010, Rio Tinto exported around 3 mt of coking coal to Indian steelmakers such as JSW Steel and Tata Steel. From 2011, it planned to cater to the thermal coal market as well.

Rio Tinto produces high grade thermal coal from its deposits in Eastern Australia. In order to compete with Indonesian coal, the cheapest source for Indian importers, the company has planned to ship the commodity in large (Capesize) vessels to India.

Besides Rio Tinto, Australia-based Intra Energy Corporation (IEC) was looking at the Indian market for exporting thermal coal. According to recent reports, the company has started coal mining in Mbalawala Mine, Ngaka coalfield in Tanzania targeting both the domestic and export thermal coal markets of Kenya, India and Mauritius.


InTERnATIOnAL

Driven by the slack economic conditions back home, the UK based mining equipment makers are flocking in large numbers to the Indian shore. The ongoing boom

in the Indian mining industry, they expect, would help them achieve “exponential” growth in the sale of their products and operations in the subcontinent over the next few years.

With this objective in mind, around 10 British companies took part in a recent roadshow in Kolkata, organised by the Association of British Mining Equipment Companies (ABMEC) and supported by British Deputy High Commission, Kolkata.

“India being a country with rich mineral assets, global players of the mining business are currently eyeing this country to leverage their business opportunities on a large

scale here. In addition, they also have large investment plans up their sleeves in the coming days,” said Ruth Bailey, Director General of ABMEC in a conversation with Coal Insights.

ABMEC had earned £595.72 million (mn) from export business in 2010-11 and is expecting the revenue to go up manifold within the next five years, out of which a lion’s share is expected to be mopped up from the Indian market.

ABMEC’s performance in 2010-11Total mining: £721.23 mn

Total non-mining: £702.89 mn

Mining Split ♦ Export: £595.72 mn ♦ Domestic: £125.51 mn ♦ ABMEC Members ♦ AmpcontrolAllenwest ♦ ATB Morley Ltd ♦ Baldwin & Francis Ltd ♦ Clayton Equipment Ltd ♦ Davis Derby Ltd ♦ Don Valley Engineering Ltd ♦ Dosco Overseas Engineering ♦ Fenner Dunlop Europe ♦ Gai–Tronics ♦ Trolex

Mining technology and safetyThe UK and international mining sectors have seen dramatic changes in recent times and have been faced with unexpected challenges. However, the British mining equipment manufacturers have responded to these challenges by developing new and ever more innovative solutions in the world of mineral extraction. Hence, according to Bailey, the

UK mining equipment makersflock to Indian shore

Sanjukta Ganguly

Ruth Bailey, Director General, ABMEC


InTERnATIOnAL

effort of all the member companies of ABMEC is focused on making mining safer, more efficient and profitable for all producers.

ABMEC Member Companies supply to: ♦ UK and world markets ♦ All major mineral extraction industries ♦ Soft and hard rock mining ♦ Surface & Tunnelling industries

Majority of these member companies have already invested heavily in research and development of better products in terms of safety and efficiency. Many more such investments are already in the pipeline. Keeping the safety aspect of the mine workers in view, how their products can be used in an efficient manner yielding better results is now the main focus area of the mining equipment manufacturers besides the profit earning aspect, informed a senior official of Baldwin & Francis Limited, one of the leading UK based manufacturers of flameproof multi-motor load centres, variable speed drives, vacuum circuit breakers, distribution transformers, intrinsically safe PLC’s and mine wide control and automation systems.

Another leading global player ATB Morley, manufacturer of bespoke electric motors principally for underground coal mining with a turnover of approximately £26 mn of which 90 percent comes from export, is also planning major investment in India in the coming year, Andy Tye, Sales Manager of the company said. He however did not reveal the proposed investment figures.

Potential vs obstaclesSteven G. Gretton, Managing Director of Clayton Equipment Limited said the main impediment to the growth of the mining equipment industry in India is “bureaucracy”. Despite the country holding immense potential for the mining equipment manufacturers, the growth of this industry is rather slow in comparison to the potential. However, India with its vast mineral assets still remains one of the main lucrative locations for the UK based mining equipment manufacturers.

Until recently, China has been one of the prime options for investment by the foreign mining equipment makers, but the mining industry in China is becoming nearly stagnant, showing hardly any growth in recent times. In contrast, the

Indian mining industry is about to take a leap forward with so many mining equipment makers waiting for their turns to invest in the industry, he added.

Another equipment manufacturer with operations in more than 16 countries echoed his views adding that more governmental support and industry-friendly policies can add to the boom of the mining industry in India which might be sustained over a long period of time.

With the Indian mining sector opening up such lucrative business opportunities for the international mining equipment manufacturers, they are already putting their best foot forward to tap this market in a major way. They have even decided to work closely with India in continuous support of their strategic aims. How do their business expansion plans shape up in India in the coming years is to be watched.


LOgIsTICs

In order to handle the increased traffic volume, the Indian Railways is implementing the Dedicated Freight Corridor (DFC) project, which should be ready by the end of the

Twelfth Plan (2016-17). As per the plans, the maximum axle load of the track will be increased to 25 tons in the dedicated corridors from 22.82 tons elsewhere.

“It is expected that the contract for civil and track works for about 1,000 route kilometres on Eastern and Western DFC would be awarded during 2012-13,” Dinesh Trivedi, former Railways minister of India said while presenting the Railway Budget for 2012-13.

The Railways has taken up the project of constructing DFCs from Ludhiana to Dankuni (Eastern Corridor) and another from Dadri to Jawaharlal Nehru Port (Western Corridor) for efficient freight transportation to and from ports and to facilitate decongestion, he added. This project, estimated to cost about `77,000 crore, includes interlinking of the two routes at Khurja in Uttar Pradesh. Hence, completion of this DFC project is undoubtedly about to facilitate coal movement to a large extent.

Funding assistance from World Bank and JICA has been tied up. A total of 6,500 hectares of land, out of 10,700 hectares required, has already been acquired so far. Moreover, the bidding process for the civil and track works has also commenced.

Rail freight Meanwhile, the share of coal in the total traffic handled by the Indian Railways is expected to go up to 49.54 percent by 2016-17 from the current level of 46.13 percent and this increased share of coal would be driven by higher movement of the material from the ports as well as from the captive blocks, according to a senior official of the Railway Board.

Most of this coal would be transported to the power sector. According to an estimate, the power sector’s requirement of coal would go up to 740 million tons (mt) by 2016-17 from 460 mt currently, he added. However, about the overall traffic growth, the official said it is estimated to go up by 40 percent during the Twelfth Plan period over 2011-12, the terminal year of the Eleventh Plan. Along with this, passenger traffic is expected to double during this period.

“The incremental traffic in the next five years is expected to be around 80 mt, which is significantly higher than the highest figure of 65 mt experienced so far,” he added.

As for the coal sector, the Railways has planned to connect the main coalfields and all ports with the power plants in next few years. In this regard, however, the Railways has asked

the coal traders and importers to space out their imports all through the year and import the majority part in the first six months of a fiscal year (April-September) when the demand for rakes from other sectors remain low.

Supplementing Railways efforts, Coal India Ltd (CIL) has proposed to invest a total of around `5,000 to `6,000 crore on a number of railway projects in its mining areas in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh for smooth evacuation of coal from its mines and transportation to consumers. As part of this initiative, CIL has already identified projects in Maan Raigadh coalfields in Chhattisgarh and North Karanpura coalfields in Jharkhand where it will set up rail tracks.

CIL has already proposed investment of `350 crore for Barood and Anuppur section that will connect to Katni line and `1,200 crore for Bhoopdevpur to Barood section which will connect to Howrah-Mumbai line for which they are carrying out survey for laying down the rail line.

To a question, the railway official said, the Railway has set a wagon (Boxon and BOBR) induction target of 9,337 units in 2011-12 against 5,619 units in 2010-11. Total number of wagons would reach 25,045 units by March 2012 compared to 16,638 units in 2010-11 and 9,575 units in 2006-07.

Meanwhile, the Railways has started joining the rakes of two trains and deploying double engines to reduce the transport time And this reduce traffic pressure. “We have already run 35 such trains. In future, we will increase the number of such trains. This is a strategy adopted to increase the number of rakes under present circumstances and thus to handle increased traffic pressure,” the official added.

Dedicated Freight Corridor to beready by end of 2017



Indian Railways revenue earnings from commodity-wise freight revenue moved up by 9.17 percent to Rs 61,215.49 crore during the first eleven months (April-February)

of 2011-12 from Rs 56,073.37 crore earned during the corresponding period of the previous financial year, according to information available with Coal Insights.

The commodity-wise freight traffic volume during the period increased by 5.16 percent to 875.6 million tons (mt) as compared to 832.66 mt during the corresponding period last year.

The data revealed that the Railways’ revenue earnings in February 2012 stood at Rs 5,832.69 crore while the freight traffic volume stood at 83.76 mt. The railways earned Rs 2,505.58 crore from transportation of 40.22 mt of coal in February 2012, marginally lower than Rs 2583.54 crore earned from transportation of 41.35 mt of coal in January 2012. However, the company had earned Rs 2,069.47 crore from transportation of 34.35 mt of coal in February 2011.

Railways’ earnings from transportation of iron ore for

exports, steel plants and other domestic uses fell to Rs 418.72 crore (8.11 mt) in February 2012 from Rs 481.60 crore (8.25 mt) in January 2012 whereas in February 2011, Indian railways had earned Rs 945.81 crore from transportation of 10.12 mt of iron ore.

Earnings from transportation of cement stood at Rs 587.4 crore (9.29 mt) in February 2012, down from Rs 615.32 crore (9.92 mt) earned during the previous month whereas the earning figure stood at Rs 542.52 crore (8.62 mt) during the corresponding month of the previous year.

Earnings from transportation of foodgrains stood at Rs 451.06 crore from transportation of 4.26 mt of foodgrains which stood at Rs 434.18 crore(4.24 mt) in January 2012 and Rs 399.77 crore (4.02 mt) in February 2011.

Revenues earned from transportation of fertilizers in February 2012 stood at Rs 382.84 crore (4.74 mt) as compared to Rs 260.68 crore (3.33 mt) and Rs 462.01 crore (5.32 mt) earned during January 2012.

LOgIsTICs

Indian Railways Apr-Feb commodity freight revenue up 9.17%


Commodity

Quantity (in mt) Earning (in rs crore)Feb'11 Feb'12 Feb'11 Feb'12

Coali) for steel plants 3.5 3.8 147.55 177.43ii) for washeries 0.11 0.12 1.33 0.98iii) for thermal power houses 22.71 27.13 1427.69 1758.83iv)for public use 8.03 9.17 492.9 568.34v) Total 34.35 40.22 2069.47 2505.58Raw material for steel plants except iron ore 1.26 1.21 96.19 94.54Pig iron and finished steel - i) from steel plants 2.13 2.23 255.41 298.46ii) from other points 0.58 0.71 55.18 52.48iii) Total 2.71 2.94 310.59 350.94Iron ore - i) for export 2.31 0.05 584.48 12.65ii) for steel plants 3.78 5.12 114.55 214.84iii) for other domestic users 4.03 2.94 246.78 191.23iv) Total 10.12 8.11 945.81 418.72Cement 8.62 9.29 542.52 587.4Foodgrains 4.02 4.26 399.77 451.06Fertilizers 3.33 4.74 260.68 382.84Mineral Oil (POL) 3.19 3.29 277.04 304.78Container Service - i) Domestic containers 0.88 0.86 83.18 77.84ii) EXIM containers 2.13 2.4 183.67 213.34iii) Total 3.01 3.26 266.85 291.18Balance other goods 6.19 6.44 416.54 445.65Totalrevenueearningtraffic. 76.8 83.76 5585.46 5832.69


LOgIsTICs

The 12 major Indian ports have handled 510.829 million tons (mt) of traffic during the April-February period of the current financial year, 0.74 percent lower than

514.636 mt recorded during the corresponding period last year.

According to data released by the Indian Ports Association (IPA), the movement of thermal coal through the major ports was up 15.87 percent to 45.762 mt during April 2011-February 2012, compared to 39.494 mt achieved during the same period last year.

The volume of coking coal, however, fell marginally by

0.38 percent to 25.976 mt during the same period, the data showed.

Among the major ports, Paradip port had the distinction of handling the highest volume of thermal coal of around 14.839 mt during the period. Visakhapatnam port, on the other hand, shipped the highest quantity of 6.347 mt of coking coal during the period.

Movement of coking coal through Paradip, Kolkata, Chennai and Mormugao ports declined during the period when compared to the corresponding period last year.

Movement of iron ore through the major ports showed a significant drop of 28.61 percent during the period under review. The major ports together handled 56.226 mt of iron ore during the April-February period compared to 78.754 mt in the corresponding period last year.

Mormugao port handled the highest volume of 26.652 mt of iron ore during the April-February period of the current fiscal. This volume, however, was about 9.05 mt less than the iron ore traffic moved during the same period last fiscal. The port has shown a negative growth of 20 percent during the period.

Movement of container traffic both in terms of tonnage and TEUs showed an increase during the April-February period. The major ports handled 109.511 mt of tonnage and 7.094 million TEUs during the period under review compared to 102.615 mt of tonnage and 6.867 mt of TEUs respectively.

Eight major ports showed positive growth in traffic handling during the April-February period of the current fiscal, while the remaining four showed negative growth on a year-on-year basis.

In terms of growth, Ennore port topped the list with a record 46.95 percent increase in cargo throughput. Mumbai port’s growth was lowest at about 0.68 percent during the period. In terms of traffic volume, Kandla port clinched the top rank with a cargo volume of 75.390 mt recorded for the period. The Mormugao port registered the highest decline of 20 percent in traffic handling during the period.

Port traffic down 0.74% y-o-y in Apr-FebCoal Insights Bureau

Traffic handled at major ports(During April to February, 2012*vis-a-vis April to February, 2011)

(*) Tentative (in ‘000 tons)

PortsApril To February % variation

Traffic Against Prev. 2012* 2011 Year Traffic

1 2 3 4KolkataKolkata Dock System 11142 11584 -3.82Haldia Dock Complex 28623 31611 -9.45Total: Kolkata 39765 43195 -7.94Paradip 49844 50644 -1.58Visakhapatnam 62184 61471 1.16Ennore 13580 9241 46.95Chennai 51300 55664 -7.84Tuticorin 25148 22222 13.17Cochin 18166 15982 13.67New Mangalore 29765 28869 3.10Mormugao 35239 44051 -20.00Mumbai 50223 49886 0.68Jnpt 60225 58552 2.86Kandla 75390 74859 0.71Total: 510829 514636 -0.74


Source: Central Electricity Authority

List of critical thermal power stations having critical coal stock ofless than 7 days (as on 29-02-2012)

NORTHERN

1 Badarpur Due to less receipt of coal from CCL during the month of February, 2012

2 Kota TPS Due to inadequate availability of coal at Chabbra TPS rakes were diverted to Chabbra TPS

3 Suratgarh Due to inadequate availability of coal at Chabbra TPS rakes were diverted to Chabbra TPS

4 Harduaganj TPS Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012

5 Chabbra Due to inadequate availability of coal

6 Dadri (NCTPP) Due to less receipt of coal from CCL during the month of February, 2012

7 Tanda Due to higher generation

8 Unchahar Due to higher generation

9 Anpara C Due to inadequate availability of coal

WESTERN

10 Koradi Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012

11 Bhusawal TPS Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012

12 Ukai Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012

13 Parli TPS Due to less receipt from SCCL and MCL during the month of February, 2012

SOUTHERN

14 Dr. N. Tata Rao Due to higher generation

15 Tuticorin Due to less receipt of coal from MCL during the month of February, 2012

16 Rayalaseema Due to less receipt from SCCL /MCL during the month of February, 2012

17 Simhadri Due to higher generation

18 Ramagundem STPS Due to higher generation

19 Raichur Due to less receipt from WCL /MCL during the month of February, 2012

20 Bellary Due to less receipt of coal from captive block during the month of February, 2012

EASTERN

21 Muzaffarpur TPS CoalsupplyregulatedasBihardeclinedtotakeitselectricityduetofinancialviability.

22 Kahalgaon Due to inadequate coal availability in linked mine ECL (Rajmahal) and inability of railways to supply more imported rakes due to change in tracks.

23 Bokaro-B Due to higher generation

24 Chandrapura(DVC) Due to higher generation

25 Talcher STPS Due to less import.

26 Durgapur steel TPS Coal supply yet to start by CIL

27 Kodarma TPS Coal supply yet to start by CIL

28 Bandel Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.

29 Kolaghat Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.

30 Bakreswar TPS Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.

31 Sagardighi Due to higher generation

32 Santaldih Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.

33 Farakka Due to inadequate coal availability in linked mine ECL (Rajmahal)

34 Mejia Due to Higher Turn around time of rakes between Raniganj and the power station and no import by DVC and supply of boulder/stones by BCCL.

pOwER sECTOR upDATE


Provisional based on actual-cum-assessment

ALL INDIA ENERGY GENERATION,

THERMAL 124308.92 712234.00 59922.00 60980.22 55749.25 101.77 109.38 642275.00 642275.08 601759.40 99.08 106.73 70.38 78.47 80.99 68.57 72.81 74.25

NUCLEAR 4780.00 25130.00 1927.00 2702.30 2653.80 140.23 101.83 23004.00 29415.12 23314.32 127.87 126.17 59.16 81.23 86.60 61.14 76.54 63.69

HYDRO 38848.40 112050.00 6645.65 7236.72 7241.39 108.89 99.94 104193.47 122046.30 104984.03 117.13 116.25

BHUTAN IMP 0.00 5586.00 48.00 68.37 63.88 142.44 107.03 5502.00 5211.06 5548.98 94.71 93.91

TOTAL 167937.32 855000.00 68542.65 70987.61 65708.32 103.57 108.03 780949.47 798947.56 735606.73 102.30 108.61

NORTHERN REGION

THERMAL 30778.26 173757.00 14567.00 15667.54 13864.18 107.56 113.01 158198.00 162520.37 149837.35 102.73 108.46 70.48 80.48 83.39 71.20 77.50 78.07

NUCLEAR 1620.00 8760.00 627.00 869.80 896.77 138.72 96.99 7978.00 9865.67 8539.48 123.66 115.53 59.27 77.14 82.38 65.28 75.75 65.76

HYDRO 15078.25 53474.07 2556.74 3127.28 3739.45 122.32 114.16 50048.54 60304.10 52039.63 120.49 115.88

TOTAL 47476.51 235991.07 17750.74 19664.62 17500.40 110.78 112.37 216224.54 232690.14 210416.46 107.62 110.59

WESTERN REGION

THERMAL 43151.31 246627.00 20744.00 20852.26 19874.00 100.52 104.92 224067.00 224987.80 213829.35 100.41 105.22 70.95 77.75 83.36 68.66 71.79 74.45

NUCLEAR 1840.00 9874.00 760.00 1182.95 1125.32 155.65 105.12 9010.00 12552.63 9413.72 139.32 133.34 59.35 92.37 91.01 60.90 84.85 63.82

HYDRO 7392.00 14644.91 1089.44 1146.16 1321.53 105.21 86.73 13461.48 18183.27 13632.90 135.08 133.38

TOTAL 52383.31 271145.91 22593.44 23181.37 22320.85 102.60 103.86 246538.48 255723.70 236875.97 103.73 107.6

SOUTHERN REGION

THERMAL 25030.80 156395.00 13250.00 13510.52 12990.82 101.97 104.00 142148.00 142931.83 132691.54 100.55 107.72 77.37 90.65 90.96 72.73 81.24 79.28

NUCLEAR 1320.00 6469.00 540.00 649.55 631.71 120.29 102.82 6016.00 6996.82 5361.12 116.30 130.51 58.78 70.70 85.46 56.69 65.93 60.41

HYDRO 11372.45 30493.04 2305.73 2519.05 2519.15 109.25 100.00 28002.30 30696.11 27175.54 109.62 112.94

TOTAL 37723.25 193384.04 16095.73 16679.12 16141.68 103.62 103.33 176166.30 180624.76 165231.20 102.53 109.32

EASTERN REGION

THERMAL 24490.05 131047.00 11002.00 10573.53 8621.79 96.11 122.64 119822.00 107690.42 101385.47 89.88 106.22 63.99 67.45 66.11 62.58 62.42 65.81

HYDRO 3847.70 9305.99 512.76 336.42 515.17 65.61 65.30 8755.89 9190.10 8396.65 104.96 109.45

TOTAL 28337.75 140352.99 11514.76 10909.95 9136.96 94.75 119.40 128577.89 116880.52 109782.12 90.90 106.47

NORTH EASTERN REGION

THERMAL 858.50 4408.00 359.00 376.65 398.46 104.92 94.53 4015.00 4144.94 4015.69 103.24 103.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

HYDRO 1158.00 4131.99 180.98 108.07 146.09 59.71 73.97 3925.26 3672.98 3736.31 93.57 98.31

TOTAL 2016.50 8539.99 539.98 484.72 544.55 89.77 89.01 7940.26 7817.92 7752.00 98.46 100.85

Category / Regions

MONITORED CAPACITY

(MW)

GENERATION (GWH) PLANT LOAD FACTOR %

TARGETApril 2011 to March 2012

FEBRUARY 2012 APRIL 2011 – FEBRUARY 2012 FEBRUARY 2012 APRIL 2011 - FEBRUARY 2012

PROGRAMME ACTUAL*ACTUAL SAME

MONTH (2010-11) % OF

PROGRAMME% OF LAST

YEARPROGRAMME ACTUAL

ACTUAL SAME PERIOD (2010-11)

% OF PROGRAMME

% OF LAST YEAR


MONTH (2010-11) PROGRAMME ACTUAL*


pOwER sECTOR upDATE



pOwER sECTOR upDATE

PROGRAMME AND PLANT LOAD FACTOR

THERMAL 124308.92 712234.00 59922.00 60980.22 55749.25 101.77 109.38 642275.00 642275.08 601759.40 99.08 106.73 70.38 78.47 80.99 68.57 72.81 74.25

NUCLEAR 4780.00 25130.00 1927.00 2702.30 2653.80 140.23 101.83 23004.00 29415.12 23314.32 127.87 126.17 59.16 81.23 86.60 61.14 76.54 63.69

HYDRO 38848.40 112050.00 6645.65 7236.72 7241.39 108.89 99.94 104193.47 122046.30 104984.03 117.13 116.25

BHUTAN IMP 0.00 5586.00 48.00 68.37 63.88 142.44 107.03 5502.00 5211.06 5548.98 94.71 93.91

TOTAL 167937.32 855000.00 68542.65 70987.61 65708.32 103.57 108.03 780949.47 798947.56 735606.73 102.30 108.61

NORTHERN REGION

THERMAL 30778.26 173757.00 14567.00 15667.54 13864.18 107.56 113.01 158198.00 162520.37 149837.35 102.73 108.46 70.48 80.48 83.39 71.20 77.50 78.07

NUCLEAR 1620.00 8760.00 627.00 869.80 896.77 138.72 96.99 7978.00 9865.67 8539.48 123.66 115.53 59.27 77.14 82.38 65.28 75.75 65.76

HYDRO 15078.25 53474.07 2556.74 3127.28 3739.45 122.32 114.16 50048.54 60304.10 52039.63 120.49 115.88

TOTAL 47476.51 235991.07 17750.74 19664.62 17500.40 110.78 112.37 216224.54 232690.14 210416.46 107.62 110.59

WESTERN REGION

THERMAL 43151.31 246627.00 20744.00 20852.26 19874.00 100.52 104.92 224067.00 224987.80 213829.35 100.41 105.22 70.95 77.75 83.36 68.66 71.79 74.45

NUCLEAR 1840.00 9874.00 760.00 1182.95 1125.32 155.65 105.12 9010.00 12552.63 9413.72 139.32 133.34 59.35 92.37 91.01 60.90 84.85 63.82

HYDRO 7392.00 14644.91 1089.44 1146.16 1321.53 105.21 86.73 13461.48 18183.27 13632.90 135.08 133.38

TOTAL 52383.31 271145.91 22593.44 23181.37 22320.85 102.60 103.86 246538.48 255723.70 236875.97 103.73 107.6

SOUTHERN REGION

THERMAL 25030.80 156395.00 13250.00 13510.52 12990.82 101.97 104.00 142148.00 142931.83 132691.54 100.55 107.72 77.37 90.65 90.96 72.73 81.24 79.28

NUCLEAR 1320.00 6469.00 540.00 649.55 631.71 120.29 102.82 6016.00 6996.82 5361.12 116.30 130.51 58.78 70.70 85.46 56.69 65.93 60.41

HYDRO 11372.45 30493.04 2305.73 2519.05 2519.15 109.25 100.00 28002.30 30696.11 27175.54 109.62 112.94

TOTAL 37723.25 193384.04 16095.73 16679.12 16141.68 103.62 103.33 176166.30 180624.76 165231.20 102.53 109.32

EASTERN REGION

THERMAL 24490.05 131047.00 11002.00 10573.53 8621.79 96.11 122.64 119822.00 107690.42 101385.47 89.88 106.22 63.99 67.45 66.11 62.58 62.42 65.81

HYDRO 3847.70 9305.99 512.76 336.42 515.17 65.61 65.30 8755.89 9190.10 8396.65 104.96 109.45

TOTAL 28337.75 140352.99 11514.76 10909.95 9136.96 94.75 119.40 128577.89 116880.52 109782.12 90.90 106.47

NORTH EASTERN REGION

THERMAL 858.50 4408.00 359.00 376.65 398.46 104.92 94.53 4015.00 4144.94 4015.69 103.24 103.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

HYDRO 1158.00 4131.99 180.98 108.07 146.09 59.71 73.97 3925.26 3672.98 3736.31 93.57 98.31

TOTAL 2016.50 8539.99 539.98 484.72 544.55 89.77 89.01 7940.26 7817.92 7752.00 98.46 100.85

Category / Regions

MONITORED CAPACITY

(MW)

GENERATION (GWH) PLANT LOAD FACTOR %

TARGETApril 2011 to March 2012

FEBRUARY 2012 APRIL 2011 – FEBRUARY 2012 FEBRUARY 2012 APRIL 2011 - FEBRUARY 2012


MONTH (2010-11) % OF

PROGRAMME% OF LAST

YEARPROGRAMME ACTUAL


% OF PROGRAMME

% OF LAST YEAR


MONTH (2010-11) PROGRAMME ACTUAL*



pOwER sECTOR upDATE

Sector-wise PLF(%) programmeand achievements (thermal)

SECTorFebruary 2012 April 2011 - February 2012

Prog. (%) ACh. (%)* Prog. (%) ACh. (%)*

Central Sector 77.58 89.59 73.95 81.62

State Sector 67.03 74.37 65.11 67.42

Pvt. UTL Sector 75.23 67.60 75.33 75.81

All India 70.38 78.47 68.47 72.81

* Provisional based on actual-cum Assessment

List of utility/organisation whose PLF achievement were lower than the respective

programme during February 2012

name of Power StationPlF in %

Programme Achievement Shortfall

I. CENTRAL

BADARPUR TPS 85.19 82.89 2.30

KAHALGAON TPS 86.88 74.13 12.75

FARAKKA TPS 76.90 66.11 10.79

TANDA TPS 96.66 94.27 2.39

DURGAPUR TPS 68.04 66.38 1.66

II. STATE

HPGCL 66.66 64.39 2.27

PSPCL 81.55 80.34 1.21

GMDCL 72.41 36.13 36.28

TNGDCL 79.48 75.02 4.46

JSEB 27.99 8.99 19.00

BSEB 23.17 8.01 15.16

OPGC 93.05 78.84 14.21

TVNL 76.97 73.68 3.29



All India PLF (%) during February 2012


Capacity Addition & Generation during Feb 2012

DescriptionFebruary 2012 February 2012

Target Achivement Target AchivementCAPACITY ADDITION (MW)THERMAL 250.00 972.00 851.00 250.00HYDRO 132.00 0.00 165.00 0.00NUCLEAR 1000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

ToTAl 1382.00 972.00 1016.00 250.00GENERATION (MU)THERMAL 59922.00 60980.21 58216.22 55749.25NUCLEAR 1927.00 2702.30 1804.00 2653.80HYDRO 6645.65 7237.60 6535.14 7241.39BHUTAN IMPORT 48.00 68.37 137.14 63.88

ToTAl 68542.65 70988.48 66692.50 65708.32Note: Generation (MU) achieved in February 2012 is provisional.

Target/Achievement in capacity addition (MW) during February 2012


Achievement in generation (MU)during February 2012


pOwER sECTOR upDATE

Capacity Addition for February 2012 and April 2011 - February 2012 (MW)

Schemes Status ofSchemes

Target2011-12

February 2012 April 2011 - February 2012 DeviationTarget Achievement Target Achievement (+) / (-)

Thermal

Central 3570.00 0.00 250.00 3570.00 3070.00 -500.00State 4101.00 250.00 351.00 4101.00 1851.00 -2250.00Pvt. 6965.00 0.00 371.00 6965.00 7130.50 165.50Total 14636.00 250.00 972.00 14636.00 12051.50 -2584.50

Hydro

Central 715.00 60.00 0.00 615.00 100.00 -515.00State 195.00 72.00 0.00 195.00 81.00 -114.00Pvt. 1170.00 0.00 0.00 1170.00 1100.00 -70.00Total 2080.00 132.00 0.00 1980.00 1281.00 -699.00

NuclearCentral 1000.00 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 -1000.00Total 1000.00 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 -1000.00

All India

Central 5285.00 1060.00 250.00 5185.00 3170.00 -2015.00State 4296.00 322.00 351.00 4296.00 1932.00 -2364.00Pvt. 8135.00 0.00 371.00 8135.00 8230.50 95.50Total 17716.00 1382.00 972.00 17616.00 13332.50 -4283.50


Capacity addition target & achievement (MW) April 2011 - February 2012

Source: Central Electricity Authority Source: Central Electricity Authority

All India energy generation duringApril 2011 - February 2012

Programme and Achievememt of Energy Generation (MU)gen. Sch. Target

20011-2012February 2012 April 2011 - February 2012

Sector-wise Programme Achievement* % Ach. Programme Achievement* % Ach.ThermalCentral Sector 279561.00 23836.00 24487.69 102.73 255152.00 254917.91 99.91State Sector 297818.00 24807.00 25842.08 104.17 270412.00 269588.84 99.70Pvt.IPP Sector 108835.00 9230.00 8811.61 95.47 98986.00 94054.32 95.02Pvt.UTL Sector 26020.00 2049.00 1838.83 89.74 23700.00 23714.00 100.06Total 712234.00 59922.00 60980.21 101.77 648250.00 642275.07 99.08HydroCentral Sector 42779.02 2121.47 2294.08 108.14 39988.05 47699.42 119.28State Sector 61941.98 4125.64 4627.86 112.17 57403.03 65906.31 114.81Pvt.IPP Sector 5764.00 294.69 194.56 66.02 5372.59 6912.98 128.67Pvt.UTL Sector 1565.00 103.85 121.10 116.61 1429.80 1529.53 106.98Total 112050.00 6645.65 7237.60 108.91 104193.47 122048.24 117.14NuclearCentral Sector 25130.00 1927.00 2702.30 140.23 23004.00 29415.12 127.87Total 25130.00 1927.00 2702.30 140.23 23004.00 29415.12 127.87Bhutan Import 5586.00 48.00 68.37 142.44 5502.00 5211.06 94.71All IndiaCentral Sector 347470.02 27884.47 29484.07 105.74 318144.05 332032.45 104.37State Sector 359759.98 28932.64 30469.94 105.31 327815.03 335495.15 102.34Pvt. Sector 142184.00 11677.54 10966.10 93.91 129488.39 126210.83 97.47Total 855000.00 68542.65 70988.48 103.57 780949.47 798949.49 102.30

* Provisional based on actual-cum-Assesment Source: Central Electricity Authority


pOwER sECTOR upDATE

Power Supply Position (Provisional) (Figures in net MU)

State/System/region

February 2012 April 2011 - February 2012requirement Availability Surplus/Deficit (-) requirement Availability Surplus/Deficit (-)

(MU) (MU) (MU) (%) (MU) (MU) (MU) (%)Chandigarh 103 103 0 0.0 1,459 1,455 -4 -0.3Delhi 1,705 1,702 -3 -0.2 25,004 24,929 -75 -0.3Haryana 3,049 2,804 -245 -8.0 34,260 32,707 -1,553 -4.5Himachal Pradesh 683 680 -3 -0.4 7,468 7,414 -54 -0.7Jammu & Kashmir* 1,319 989 -330 -25.0 12,967 9,927 -3,040 -23.4Punjab 3,007 2,923 -84 -2.8 41,932 40,599 -1,333 -3.2Rajasthan 4,786 4,616 -170 -3.6 46,541 44,674 -1,867 -4.0Uttar Pradesh 6,801 5,947 -854 -12.6 74,354 65,890 -8,464 -11.4Uttarakhand 879 838 -41 -4.7 9,619 9,344 -275 -2.9Northern Region 22,332 20,602 -1,730 -7.7 253,604 236,939 -16,665 -6.6Chattisgarh 1,134 1,108 -26 -2.3 13,352 12,967 -385 -2.9Gujarat 5,878 5,859 -19 -0.3 68,038 67,788 -250 -0.4Madhya Pradesh 4,716 3,705 -1,011 -21.4 45,539 38,044 -7,495 -16.5Maharashtra 11,986 9,787 -2,199 -18.3 129,870 107,521 -22,349 -17.2Daman & Diu 160 143 -17 -10.6 1,987 1,781 -206 -10.4Dadar Nagar Haveli 345 344 -1 -0.3 4,091 4,060 -31 -0.8Goa 207 205 -2 -1.0 2,763 2,727 -36 -1.3Western Region 24,426 21,151 -3,275 -13.4 265,640 234,888 -30,752 -11.6Andhra Pradesh 7,712 7,107 -605 -7.8 81,810 76,641 -5,169 -6.3Karnataka 5,680 4,954 -726 -12.8 54,437 48,564 -5,873 -10.8Kerala 1,669 1,626 -43 -2.6 17,940 17,562 -378 -2.1Tamil Nadu 7,135 5,526 -1,609 -22.6 77,668 70,660 -7,008 -9.0Puducherry 167 165 -2 -1.2 1,965 1,937 -28 -1.4Lakshadweep # 3 3 0 0 34 34 0 0Southern Region 22,363 19,378 -2,985 -13.3 233,820 215,364 -18,456 -7.9Bihar 1,200 920 -280 -23.3 13,044 10,163 -2,881 -22.1DVC 1,483 1,402 -81 -5.5 15,118 14,511 -607 -4.0Jharkhand 477 442 -35 -7.3 5,619 5,439 -180 -3.2Orissa 2,001 1,883 -118 -5.9 20,916 20,616 -300 -1.4West Bengal 2,924 2,885 -39 -1.3 35,068 34,674 -394 -1.1Sikkim 24 24 0 0.0 340 336 -4 -1.2Andaman- Nicobar# 21 21 0 0 223 183 -40 -18Eastern Region 8,109 7,556 -553 -6.8 90,105 85,739 -4,366 -4.8Arunachal Pradesh 44 41 -3 -6.8 549 504 -45 -8.2Assam 460 430 -30 -6.5 5,573 5,263 -310 -5.6Manipur 37 32 -5 -13.5 512 467 -45 -8.8Meghalaya 154 108 -46 -29.9 1,766 1,335 -431 -24.4Mizoram 32 29 -3 -9.4 366 328 -38 -10.4Nagaland 39 35 -4 -10.3 518 472 -46 -8.9Tripura 71 68 -3 -4.2 871 825 -46 -5.3N. Eastern Region 837 743 -94 -11.2 10,155 9,194 -961 -9.5All India 78,067 69,430 -8,637 -11.1 853,324 782,124 -71,200 -8.3

# Lakshadweep and A & N Islands stand-alone systems, power supply position of these, does not form part of regional requirement and availability.



pOwER sECTOR upDATE

Peak Demand/Peak Met (Provisional)(Figures in net MW)

State/System/region

February 2012 April’11 - February 2012Peak Demand Peak Met Surplus/Deficit (-) Peak Demand Peak Met Surplus/Deficit (-)

(MU) (MU) (MU) (%) (MU) (MU) (MU) (%)Chandigarh 212 212 0 0.0 263 263 0 0.0Delhi 3,665 3,608 -57 -1.6 5,031 5,028 -3 -0.1Haryana 5,440 5,078 -362 -6.7 6,533 6,259 -274 -4.2Himachal Pradesh 1,159 1,140 -19 -1.6 1,335 1,295 -40 -3.0Jammu & Kashmir* 2,165 1,649 -516 -23.8 2,361 1,771 -590 -25.0Punjab 5,063 4,913 -150 -3.0 10,471 8,701 -1,770 -16.9Rajasthan 7,779 7,545 -234 -3.0 8,188 7,545 -643 -7.9Uttar Pradesh 11,358 10,318 -1,040 -9.2 12,038 11,616 -422 -3.5Uttarakhand 1,542 1,542 0 0.0 1,612 1,586 -26 -1.6Northern Region 36,684 33,167 -3,517 -9.6 40,248 37,117 -3,131 -7.8Chattisgarh 2,935 2,847 -88 -3.0 3,239 2,851 -388 -12.0Gujarat 9,774 9,638 -136 -1.4 10,951 10,759 -192 -1.8Madhya Pradesh 8,874 7,416 -1,458 -16.4 9,151 7,842 -1,309 -14.3Maharashtra 19,697 16,417 -3,280 -16.7 21,069 16,417 -4,652 -22.1Daman & Diu 284 259 -25 -8.8 301 276 -25 -8.3Dadar Nagar Haveli 569 569 0 0.0 615 605 -10 -1.6Goa 435 406 -29 -6.7 514 471 -43 -8.4Western Region 41,277 35,535 -5,742 -13.9 42,352 35,952 -6,400 -15.1Andhra Pradesh 12,648 11,313 -1,335 -10.6 13,254 11,591 -1,663 -12.5Karnataka 9,883 8,065 -1,818 -18.4 9,883 8,065 -1,818 -18.4Kerala 3,436 3,216 -220 -6.4 3,436 3,216 -220 -6.4Tamil Nadu 11,866 8,980 -2,886 -24.3 11,911 10,566 -1,345 -11.3Puducherry 288 286 -2 -0.7 335 320 -15 -4.5Lakshadweep # 8 8 0 0 8 8 0 0Southern Region 35,343 29,982 -5,361 -15.2 35,343 31,489 -3,854 -10.9Bihar 1,879 1,470 -409 -21.8 2,031 1,738 -293 -14.4DVC 2,126 2,014 -112 -5.3 2,318 2,026 -292 -12.6Jharkhand 851 779 -72 -8.5 1,030 842 -188 -18.3Orissa 3,247 3,098 -149 -4.6 3,589 3,526 -63 -1.8West Bengal 5,777 5,712 -65 -1.1 6,555 6,378 -177 -2.7Sikkim 90 90 0 0.0 100 95 -5 -5.0Andaman- Nicobar# 48 48 0 0 48 48 0 0Eastern Region 13,563 12,780 -783 -5.8 14,505 13,971 -534 -3.7Arunachal Pradesh 90 87 -3 -3.3 121 118 -3 -2.5Assam 987 946 -41 -4.2 1,112 1,053 -59 -5.3Manipur 105 104 -1 -1.0 116 115 -1 -0.9Meghalaya 290 255 -35 -12.1 319 267 -52 -16.3Mizoram 82 76 -6 -7.3 82 78 -4 -4.9Nagaland 100 99 -1 -1.0 111 105 -6 -5.4Tripura 165 165 0 0.0 215 214 -1 -0.5N -Eastern Region 1,813 1,622 -191 -10.5 1,920 1,782 -138 -7.2All India 128,680 113,086 -15,594 -12.1 128,680 114,233 -14,447 -11.2

# Lakshadweep and A & N Islands stand-alone systems, power supply position of these, does not form part of regional requirement and availability.



Power supply to agricultural sector during February 2012State/region Average hours of supply

Northern RegionChandigarh 24 hrs./day

–

Delhi N/AHaryana Three Phase Supply : average 10.40 hrs/dayHP 24 hrs./dayJ & K –Punjab Three phase supply: 4.94 hrs/dayRajasthan Three phase supply: 06.00 hrs/dayUttar Pradesh Three phase supply: average 9.47 hrs/dayUttarakhand 23.43 hrs./dayWestern RegionChattisgarh Three phase supply: 18 hrs/day –

Gujarat Only 8 hours power supply in staggered form in rotation of day and night is given to Agriculture. No supply during rest of 16 hours.Jyotigram Yojana 24 hrs.

Madhya Pradesh Three phase supply: 11:23 hrs /day (average) Single phase supply: 00:00 hrs./Day (average)Maharashtra Three phase supply: 8 hrs/day (average) Single phase supply: 16 hrs/day (average)Goa No restrictionSouthern RegionAndhra Pradesh Three phase supply: 07 hrs/day. –Karnataka Three phase/single phase supply: 06 hrs/day No supply: 6-12 hrs/dayKerala No restrictionsTamil Nadu Three phase supply: 9 hrs/day Single phase supply: 15 hrs/dayPuducherry No restrictionsEastern RegionBihar About 18 hrs

–Jharkhand About 20 hrsOrissa 24 hrs.West Bengal Average about 23 hrs

* Data not furnished for current month.

Sub-Stations (Prog & Achiv) February 2012 Fig. in MVA/MW

voltagelevel/Sector Programme 2011-12

Feb 2012 Apr 2011-Feb 2012Prog. Achv. Prog. Achv.

+/- 500 kV HVDCCentral Sector 0 0 0 0 0State Sector 0 0 0 0 0TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0765 kVCentral Sector 3315 0 6000 0 9000State Sector 1000 0 0 1000 0TOTAL 4315 0 6000 1000 9000400 kVCentral Sector 2630 0 945 2000 8170State Sector 5780 0 1890 5235 6650JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 0TOTAL 8410 0 2835 7235 14820220 kVCentral Sector 940 0 0 840 180State Sector 13715 0 1650 9100 13740JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 127TOTAL 14655 0 1650 9940 14047grAnD ToTAl 27380 0 10485 18175 37867


Transmission lines (prog & achiv) February 2012Fig. in ckt Kms

voltagelevel/Sector Programme 2011-12 Feb 2012 Apr 2011-Feb 2012

Prog. Achv. Prog. Achv.+/- 800 kV HVDCCentral Sector 0 0 0 0 0State Sector 0 0 0 0 0TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0+/- 500 kV HVDCCentral Sector 0 0 0 0 0JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 0TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0765 kVCentral Sector 822 0 740 13 1096State Sector 2 0 0 2 1TOTAL 824 0 740 15 1097400 kVCentral Sector 6762 928 970 6935 7130State Sector 2626 0 245 2346 1578JV/Private Sector 3013 0 0 3037 988TOTAL 12401 928 1215 12318 9896220kVCentral Sector 575 0 0 575 155State Sector 5992 0 505 5982 4122JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 2TOTAL 6567 0 505 6557 4279grAnD ToTAl 19792 928 2460 18890 15072


pOwER sECTOR upDATE


Generation capacity addition during 2011-12 (Programme & Achievement)

Sl. no. Unit name Unit no. State Company Type

Capacity (MW) Commissioning Schedule

Prog. Ach. As per Prog. Actual (A)

1st QUArTEr (APrIl - JUnE 2011)

CEnTrAl SECTor1 Koderma # 1 Jharkhand DVC TH 500.00 500.00 June, 11 20.07.11 (A)

STATE SECTor2 Priyadarshini Jurala 6 AP APGENCO HY 39.00 39.00 June,11 09.06.11(A)3 Myntdu 1 Meghalaya MeECL HY 42.00 42.00 June,11 23.11.11(A)4 Khaperkheda TPS Expn # 5 Maharashtra MSPGCL TH 500.00 500.00 June,11 05.08.11(A)5 Kothagudem TPP - VI 11 A.P. APGENCO TH 500.00 500.00 June,11 26.06.11(A)

PrIvATE SECTor6

Malana-II1 H.P. Everest PPL HY 50.00 50.00 May,11 06.08.11(A)

7 2 H.P. Everest PPL HY 50.00 50.00 June,11 14.08.11(A)8 Karcham Wangtoo 1 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 May,11 24-05-11(A)9 JSW Ratnagiri TPP # 3 Maharashtra JSW Energy (Ratnagiri) ltd TH 300.00 300.00 May,11 06-05-11 (A)10 Maithon RB TPP # 1 Jharkhand DVC- Tata JV TH 525.00 525.00 June,11 30.06.11 (A)11 Udupi TPP # 2 Karnatka UPCL TH 600.00 600.00 April, 11 17-04-11 (A)12 Wardha Warora @ 4 Maharashtra Wardha Power Co. Ltd (KSK) TH 135.00 135.00 April, 11 30-04-11 (A)

Sub Total 3491.00 3491.00

IInd QUArTEr (JUly - SEPTEMBEr 2011)

CEnTrAl SECTor13

Chamera-III1 H.P. NHPC HY 77.00 Aug,11

14 2 H.P. NHPC HY 77.00 Sep,1115 Sipat -1 * 1 C.G. NTPC TH 660.00 660.00 July,11 28.06.11 (A)16 Durgapur Steel TPS # 1 WB DVC TH 500.00 500.00 Aug,11 29.07.11 (A)

STATE SECTor17 Myntdu 2 Meghalaya MeECL HY 42.00 July,1118 Harduaganj Extn # 8 UP UPRVUNL TH 250.00 250.00 Sep,11 27.09.11(A)19 Bhusawal TPS Expn # 4 Maharashtra MSPGCL TH 500.00 July,1120 Santaldih TPP Extn Ph-II # 6 WB WBPDCL TH 250.00 250.00 July,11 29.06.11(A)21 Hazira CCPP Extn # GT+ST Gujarat GSECL GT+ST 351.00 Aug,11 18.2.12(A)22 Pragati CCGT- III # GT-3 Delhi PPCL GT-3 250.00 Sep,11

PrIvATE SECTor23

Karcham Wangtoo2 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 July,11 21.06.11(A)

24 3 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 Aug,11 08.09.11(A)25 Jallipa-Kapurdi TPP # 3 Rajasthan Raj West Power ltd TH 135.00 135.00 Aug,11 02.11.11(A)26 Anpara-C TPS # 1 UP Lanco Anpara Power Pvt. Ltd TH 600.00 600.00 July,11 15.11.11(A)27 Mundra UM TPP 1 Gujarat Tata Power Ltd TH 800.00 Aug,1128 Mundra TPP Ph-II 2 Gujarat Adani Power Ltd TH 660.00 660.00 Aug,11 20.07.11 (A)

Sub Total 5652.00 3906.00

IIIrd QUArTEr (oCToBEr - DECEMBEr 2011)

CEnTrAl SECTor29

Chutak

1 J&K NHPC HY 11 Oct,1130 2 J&K NHPC HY 11 Nov,1131 3 J&K NHPC HY 11 Nov,1132 4 J&K NHPC HY 11 Dec,1133 Koteshwar 3 Uttranchal THDC HY 100.00 Nov,1134 Chamera-III 1 HP NHPC HY 77.00 Oct,1135

Uri-II1 J&K NHPC HY 60.00 Nov,11

36 2 J&K NHPC HY 60.00 Dec,11

pOwER sECTOR upDATE


37 Indra Gandhi TPP 2 Haryana APCPL TH 500.00 500.00 Nov,11 05.11.11(A)38 Sipat -2* 1 C.G. NTPC TH 660.00 600.00 Nov,11 24.12.11(A)39 Neyveli TPS Exp # 1 T.N. NLC TH 250.00 250.00 Oct,11 04.02.12(A)

STATE SECTor40 Bellary TPP St-II 2 Karnatka KPCL TH 500.00 Nov,1141 Pragati CCGT- III ST-1 # ST-1 Delhi PPCL ST-1 250.00 Oct,11

PrIvATE SECTor42

Budhil1 HP LANCO HY 35.00 Oct,11

43 2 HP LANCO HY 35.00 Nov,1144 Karcham Wangtoo 4 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 Oct,11 13.09.11(A)45 JSW Ratnagiri TPP # 4 Maharashtra JSW Energy (Ratnagiri) ltd TH 300.00 300.00 Oct,11 08.10.11(A)46 Anpara-C TPS # 2 UP Lanco Anpara Power Pvt. Ltd. TH 600.00 600.00 Oct,11 12.11.11(A)47 Sterlite (Jharsugda)* 3 Orissa Sterlite Energy Ltd. TH 600.00 600.00 Oct,11 16.08.11(A)48 Rithala CCPP ST Delhi NDPL TH 36.50 04.09.11 (A)49 Khamberkhera IPP 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 45.00 17.10.11(A)50 Jallipa-KapurdiTPP # 4 Rajasthan Raj West Power Ltd. TH 135.00 Aug11 23.11.11(A)51 Maqssodpur IPP 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Ltd. TH 45.00 03.11.11(A)52 Barkhera TPP 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Ltd. TH 45.00 06.11.11(A)53 Mundra TPP Ph-II 1 Gujrat Adani Power ltd. TH 660.00 07.11.11(A)54 Khamberkhera IPP 2 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. Th 45.00 28.11.11(A)

55 Kasaipalli 1 C.G. ACB India Ltd. TH 135.00 13.12.11(A)56 SVL 1 C.G. SV Power Ltd. TH 63.00 07.12.11(A)57 Rosa 3 U.P. Rosa Power Co. Ltd. TH 300.00 28.12.11(A)

Sub Total 4321.00 4669.50

Ivth QUArTEr (JAnUAry - MArCh 2012)

CEnTrAl SECTor58

Kudankulam1 TN NPC Nucl. 1000.00 Feb,12

59 2 TN NPC Nucl. 1000.00 Feb1260 Uri-II 3 J&K NHPC HY 60.00 Jan,1261 Koteshwar 4 Uttranchal THDC HY 100.00 100.00 Mar,12 25.01.12(A)

STATE SECTor62 Myntdu 3 Meghalaya MeECL HY 42.00 Feb,1263 Harduaganj Extn # 9 UP UPRVUNL TH 250.00 Feb,1264 Bhusawal TPS Expn 5 Maharashtra MSPGCL TH 500.00 Jan,1265 Maithon RB TPP 2 Jharkhand JV of DVC-Tata TH 525.00 Jan,1266 Tirora TPP Ph-1 1 Maharashtra Adani Power Ltd. TH 660.00 Jan,1267 Maqsoodpur IPP 2 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt, Ltd TH 45.00 21.01.12(A)68 Barkhera TPP 2 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt, Ltd TH 45.00 28.01.12(A)69 Kundarki 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt, Ltd TH 45.00 10.01.12(A)70 Mahatma Gandhi TPP 1 Haryana Jhajjar Power Ltd. TH 660.00 12.01.12(A)

PrIvATE SECTor71 Mihan TPP 1 to 4 Maharashtra Abhijeet MADC Enegy Pvt. Ltd. TH 246.00 09.02.12(A)72 Katghora TPP 1 C. G. Vandna Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 35.00 14.01.12 (A)73 Utraula TPP 1 U. P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 45.00 21.02.12 (A)74 Kunderki TPP 2 U. P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 45.00 29.02.12(A)

Sub Total 4137.00 1266.00

grand Total 17601.00 13332.50

Generation capacity addition during 2011-12 (contd.)

Sl. no. Unit name Unit no. State Company Type

Capacity (MW) Commissioning Schedule

Prog. Ach. As per Prog. Actual (A)


pOwER sECTOR upDATE

Note : * - 11th Plan Best effort Units; # - Units slipped from 2010-11 Target; @ - Additional Units not included in 11th Plan Target


E-AuCTIOn

Monthwise Quantity Offered & Sold through coaljunction & MSTC E-Auction Qty. In Tons

MonTh oFFErED QTy (in tons) SolD QTy (in tons) variation (In Percent)Jan'11 3,319,686 2,608,551 -21.42Feb'11 3,562,770 2,805,310 -21.26Mar'11 3,249,800 2,481,981 -23.63Apr'11 2,834,160 2,179,060 -23.11May'11 2,838,672 2,328,720 -17.96June'11 1,860,004 1,303,176 -29.94July'11 2,512,015 2,255,313 -10.22Aug'11 2,183,370 1,764,911 -19.17Sept'11 2,578,082 2,203,438 -14.53Oct'11 591,910 385,904 -34.8Nov'11 3,309,434 2,891,019 -12.64Dec'11 2,926,557 2,632,049 -10.06Jan'12 4,771,008 3,758,496 -21.22

Companywise Data of Sold Quantity through coaljunction & MSTC in Jan’12 (Road & Rail) Qty. In Tons

SUBSIDIAry nAME rAIl roAD grand TotalBCCL - 234,000 234,000MCL 237,000 1,124,080 1,124,080NCL - 180,960 180,960SCCL - 216,996 216,996SECL - 1,249,250 1,249,250WCL - 516,210 516,210Grand Total 237,000 3,521,496 3,758,496

0

500,000

1,000,0001,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,0004,000,000

4,500,000

5,000,000

Apr'1

1

May

'11

June

'11

July'

11

Aug'1

1

Sept

'11

Oct

'11

Nov'1

1

Dec'1

1

Jan'1

2

Qty

Offe

red

In T

ons

OFFERED BY ROAD OFFERED BY RAIL

Monthly Data of Offered QuantityThrough coaljunction & MSTC (Road & Rail)

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

Apr'1

1

May

'11

June

'11

July'

11

Aug'1

1

Sept

'11

Oct

'11

Nov'1

1

Dec'1

1

Jan'1

2

Qua

ntity

in T

ons

OFFERED QTY (in tons) SOLD QTY (in tons)

Quantity Offered & Sold through coaljunction & MSTC

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

BCC

L R

OAD

BCC

L R

AIL

MC

L R

OAD

MC

L R

AIL

NC

L R

OAD

NC

L R

AIL

NEC

RO

AD

NEC

RAI

L

SEC

L R

OAD

SEC

L R

AIL

ECL

RO

AD

ECL

RAI

L

WC

L R

OAD

WC

L R

AIL

SCC

L R

OAD

SCC

L R

AIL

CC

L R

OAD

CC

L R

AIL

Companies

Qua

ntity

In T

ons

Jan'12 QTY OFFERED Jan'12 QTY SOLD Dec-11 QTY OFFERED Dec-11 QTY SOLD

Companywise Quantity Offered & Sold Through coaljunction & MSTC In Jan’12 Vs Dec’11

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

BCCL MCL NCL SCCL SECL WCL

SUBSIDIARY NAME

Qua

ntity

(in

Tons

)

RAIL ROAD

Companywise Data of Sold Quantity Throughcoaljunction & MSTC in Jan’12 (Road & Rail)

Monthly Data of Offered Quantity through coaljunction and MSTC (Road & Rail) Qty. In Tons

MonTh oFFErED By roAD oFFErED By rAIlJan'11 2,991,320 328,366Feb'11 2,824,250 738,520Mar'11 2,922,850 326,950Apr'11 2,466,770 367,390May'11 2,564,788 273,884June'11 1,724,469 135,535July'11 2,236,945 275,070Aug'11 2,091,330 92,040Sept'11 2,262,732 315,350Oct'11 512,850 79,060Nov'11 3,083,582 225,852Dec'11 2,706,157 220,400Jan'12 4,518,196 252,812

Jan'12 Dec-11 variation (In Percent)QTy

oFFErED QTy SolD QTy oFFErED QTy SolD oFFErED

QTy SolD QTy

BCCL ROAD 401,496 234,000 174,000 133,050 130.74% 75.87%BCCL RAIL 15,812 0 39,500 39,500 -59.97% -100.00%MCL ROAD 1,533,000 1,124,080 723,000 544,300 112.03% 106.52%MCL RAIL 237,000 237,000 - - NA NANCL ROAD 181,000 180,960 75,000 75,000 141.33% 141.28%NCL RAIL - - - - NA NANEC ROAD - - - - NA NANEC RAIL - - 27500 27500 NA NASECL ROAD 1,454,650 1,249,250 731,750 715,800 98.79% 74.53%SECL RAIL - - - - NA NAECL ROAD - - 75,607 51,180 NA NAECL RAIL - - 153,400 153,400 NA NAWCL ROAD 731,050 516,210 469,200 469,160 55.81% 10.03%WCL RAIL - - - - NA NASCCL ROAD 217,000 216,996 125,000 121,339 73.60% 78.83%SCCL RAIL - - - - NA NACCL ROAD - - 332,600 301,820 NA NACCL RAIL - - - - NA NATOTAL 4,771,008 3,758,496 2,926,557 2,632,049 63.02% 42.80%

Companywise Quantity Offered & Sold Through coaljunction & MSTC in January’12 Vs December’11 Via Rail & Road Qty. In Tons

NOTE : Data for the period January 2011 - December 2011 is for e-auction through coaljuntion only, while data for January 2012 inculdes MSTC


8%21%

20%

17%12%

10%

6% 5% 1%

VIZAG MUNDRA MUMBAIPARADIP NEW MANGALORE KANDLAKOLKATA MORMUGAO OTHERS

8%

5%

8%

11%

12%

21%

27%8%

MUNDRA VIZAG KANDLA MUMBAI KOLKATA PARADIP CHENNAI OTHERS

4%11%

80%

3% 2%

AUSTRALIA UNITED STATES NEW ZEALANDSOUTH AFRICA OTHERS

20%3%

77%

INDONESIA SOUTH AFRICA AUSTRALIA

Note: Name of importers for coal and coke will be provided on request. Figures are based on consignment lifted from these ports for which price details/break-up is available with Coal Insights team

Major Ports through Which Steam Coal Arrived in India Nov’11-Jan’12

Major Coking Coal Supplier Countries to India (through Mentioned Ports) - Nov’11-Jan’12

Major Steam Coal Supplier Countries to India (through Mentioned Ports) - Nov’11-Jan’12

0%1%

15%

18%

20%

39%

5% 2%

VIZAG PARADIP KOLKATAMORMUGAO MUNDRA NEW MANGALOREKANDLA CHENNAI

Major Ports through which Coking CoalArrived in India Nov’11-Jan’12

Port Qty (in Tons)VIZAG 1993538MUNDRA 1869395MUMBAI 1570756PARADIP 1095886NEW MANGALORE 961045

KANDLA 761941

KOLKATA 525591

MORMUGAO 508652

OTHERS 63526

grand Total 9350329

Country of origin Qty (in Tons)

INDONESIA 7206846

SOUTH AFRICA 1884521

AUSTRALIA 258962

grand Total 9350329

Port Qty (in Tons)VIZAG 2695331PARADIP 1401399KOLKATA 1304378MORMUGAO 1085788MUNDRA 378523NEW MANGALORE 158576KANDLA 82000CHENNAI 523grand Total 7106519

Country of origin Qty (in Tons)

AUSTRALIA 5641536UNITED STATES 804109NEW ZEALAND 252120SOUTH AFRICA 236829OTHERS 171925

grand Total 7106519

Major Ports Through Which Steam Coal Arrived in India Nov’11-Jan’12

Major Steam Coal Supplier Countries to India (through Mentioned Ports) Nov’11-Jan’12

Major Coking Coal Supplier Countries to India (through Mentioned Ports) Nov’11-Jan’12

Major Ports through which Coking CoalArrived in India Nov’11-Jan’12

pORT DATA

COAL INSIGHTS 86 MArCH 2012 Tear

alo

ng th

e do

tted

line

Tear

alo

ng th

e do

tted

line

Date post:	25-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	mjunction-services-ltd
View:	248 times
Download:	0 times

Coal Insights - Mar 2012

Documents