994 resultados para market situation
Resumo:
El sector energético, en España en particular, y de forma similar en los principales países de Europa, cuenta con una significativa sobrecapacidad de generación, debido al rápido y significativo crecimiento de las energías renovables en los últimos diez años y la reducción de la demanda energética, como consecuencia de la crisis económica. Esta situación ha hecho que las centrales térmicas de generación de electricidad, y en concreto los ciclos combinados de gas, operen con un factor de utilización extremadamente bajo, del orden del 10%. Además de la reducción de ingresos, esto supone para las plantas trabajar continuamente fuera del punto de diseño, provocando una significativa pérdida de rendimiento y mayores costes de explotación. En este escenario, cualquier contribución que ayude a mejorar la eficiencia y la condición de los equipos, es positivamente considerada. La gestión de activos está ganando relevancia como un proceso multidisciplinar e integrado, tal y como refleja la reciente publicación de las normas ISO 55000:2014. Como proceso global e integrado, la gestión de activos requiere el manejo de diversos procesos y grandes volúmenes de información, incluso en tiempo real. Para ello es necesario utilizar tecnologías de la información y aplicaciones de software. Esta tesis desarrolla un concepto integrado de gestión de activos (Integrated Plant Management – IPM) aplicado a centrales de ciclo combinado y una metodología para estimar el beneficio aportado por el mismo. Debido a las incertidumbres asociadas a la estimación del beneficio, se ha optado por un análisis probabilístico coste-beneficio. Así mismo, el análisis cuantitativo se ha completado con una validación cualitativa del beneficio aportado por las tecnologías incorporadas al concepto de gestión integrada de activos, mediante una entrevista realizada a expertos del sector de generación de energía. Los resultados del análisis coste-beneficio son positivos, incluso en el desfavorable escenario con un factor de utilización de sólo el 10% y muy prometedores para factores de utilización por encima del 30%. ABSTRACT The energy sector particularly in Spain, and in a similar way in Europe, has a significant overcapacity due to the big growth of the renewable energies in the last ten years, and it is seriously affected by the demand decrease due to the economic crisis. That situation has forced the thermal plants and in particular, the combined cycles to operate with extremely low annual average capacity factors, very close to 10%. Apart from the incomes reduction, working in out-of-design conditions, means getting a worse performance and higher costs than expected. In this scenario, anything that can be done to improve the efficiency and the equipment condition is positively received. Asset Management, as a multidisciplinary and integrated process, is gaining prominence, reflected in the recent publication of the ISO 55000 series in 2014. Dealing Asset Management as a global, integrated process needs to manage several processes and significant volumes of information, also in real time, that requires information technologies and software applications to support it. This thesis proposes an integrated asset management concept (Integrated Plant Management-IPM) applied to combined cycle power plants and develops a methodology to assess the benefit that it can provide. Due to the difficulties in getting deterministic benefit estimation, a statistical approach has been adopted for the cot-benefit analysis. As well, the quantitative analysis has been completed with a qualitative validation of the technologies included in the IPM and their contribution to key power plant challenges by power generation sector experts. The cost- benefit analysis provides positive results even in the negative scenario of annual average capacity factor close to 10% and is promising for capacity factors over 30%.
Resumo:
The most straightforward European single energy market design would entail a European system operator regulated by a single European regulator. This would ensure the predictable development of rules for the entire EU, significantly reducing regulatory uncertainty for electricity sector investments. But such a first-best market design is unlikely to be politically realistic in the European context for three reasons. First, the necessary changes compared to the current situation are substantial and would produce significant redistributive effects. Second, a European solution would deprive member states of the ability to manage their energy systems nationally. And third, a single European solution might fall short of being well-tailored to consumers’ preferences, which differ substantially across the EU. To nevertheless reap significant benefits from an integrated European electricity market, we propose the following blueprint: First, we suggest adding a European system-management layer to complement national operation centres and help them to better exchange information about the status of the system, expected changes and planned modifications. The ultimate aim should be to transfer the day-to-day responsibility for the safe and economic operation of the system to the European control centre. To further increase efficiency, electricity prices should be allowed to differ between all network points between and within countries. This would enable throughput of electricity through national and international lines to be safely increased without any major investments in infrastructure. Second, to ensure the consistency of national network plans and to ensure that they contribute to providing the infrastructure for a functioning single market, the role of the European ten year network development plan (TYNDP) needs to be upgraded by obliging national regulators to only approve projects planned at European level unless they can prove that deviations are beneficial. This boosted role of the TYNDP would need to be underpinned by resolving the issues of conflicting interests and information asymmetry. Therefore, the network planning process should be opened to all affected stakeholders (generators, network owners and operators, consumers, residents and others) and enable the European Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) to act as a welfare-maximising referee. An ultimate political decision by the European Parliament on the entire plan will open a negotiation process around selecting alternatives and agreeing compensation. This ensures that all stakeholders have an interest in guaranteeing a certain degree of balance of interest in the earlier stages. In fact, transparent planning, early stakeholder involvement and democratic legitimisation are well suited for minimising as much as possible local opposition to new lines. Third, sharing the cost of network investments in Europe is a critical issue. One reason is that so far even the most sophisticated models have been unable to identify the individual long-term net benefit in an uncertain environment. A workable compromise to finance new network investments would consist of three components: (i) all easily attributable cost should be levied on the responsible party; (ii) all network users that sit at nodes that are expected to receive more imports through a line extension should be obliged to pay a share of the line extension cost through their network charges; (iii) the rest of the cost is socialised to all consumers. Such a cost-distribution scheme will involve some intra-European redistribution from the well-developed countries (infrastructure-wise) to those that are catching up. However, such a scheme would perform this redistribution in a much more efficient way than the Connecting Europe Facility’s ad-hoc disbursements to politically chosen projects, because it would provide the infrastructure that is really needed.
Resumo:
Nord Stream increases Gazprom’s flexibility as far its export routes are concerned; it enables them to be changed with regard to the market or political situation. Nevertheless, this expensive pipeline may contribute to a further drop in the price competitiveness of Russian gas. Accordingly, increasing the attractiveness of Russian fuel and ensuring profitable sales is steadily becoming the main challenge for Gazprom in the EU against a backdrop of increasing competitiveness on the market.
Resumo:
Russia, being aware of the evolution of the EU gas market and the fluctuations in trends that accompany it, and in an attempt to maintain its position on the European gas market, is sticking to a dichotomous strategy. On the one hand, Moscow has taken an offensive approach: it continues its traditionally critical rhetoric with regard to the legal and institutional changes; by negating the legitimacy of the new rules, it has been making efforts to undermine them by employing legal and political measures; Russia has used such traditional economic means as investments in assets and pushing through the implementation of new gas pipeline construction projects. On the other hand, the evolution of the EU gas market has forced Russia to take steps to adapt to a certain extent: partial changes in the operation of the internal gas sector; promises to further curb Gazprom’s dominant position; the concessions made in trade negotiations with European partners; partial adjustments to the EU’s so called third energy package regulations. Hoping that the unfolding situation on the gas markets will contribute to slowing down the recent liberalisation tendencies in the EU and that EU member states won’t make progress in decreasing their dependence on Russian gas, Moscow is thus preparing itself for the ‘long game’ in gas with its European partners.
Resumo:
The macroeconomic results achieved by Belarus in 2012 laid bare the weakness and the inefficiency of its economy. Belarus’s GDP and positive trade balance were growing in the first half of last year. However, this trend was reversed when Russia blocked the scheme of extremely lucrative manipulations in the re-export of Russian petroleum products by Belarus and when the demand for potassium fertilisers fell on the global market. It became clear once again that the outdated Belarusian model of a centrally planned economy is unable to generate sustainable growth, and the Belarusian economy needs thorough structural reforms. Nevertheless, President Alyaksandr Lukashenka consistently continues to block any changes in the system and at the same time expects that the economic indicators this year will reach levels far beyond the possibilities of the Belarusian economy. Therefore, there is a risk that the Belarusian government may employ – as they used to do – instruments aimed at artificially stimulating domestic demand, including money creation. This may upset the relative stability of state finances, which the regime managed to achieve last year. The worst case scenario would see a repeat of what happened in 2011, when a serious financial crisis occurred, forcing Minsk to make concessions (including selling the national network of gas pipelines) to Moscow, its only real source of loans. It thus cannot be ruled out that also this time the only way to recover from the slump will be to receive additional loan support and energy subsidies from Russia at the expense of selling further strategic companies to Russian investors.
Resumo:
As the difficulties Gazprom has faced in recent years on the European market have multiplied1, so more and more symptoms have appeared which may suggest that the company’s dominant position is deteriorating. The decision made by the Russian government in June 2011 to double the tax Gazprom has to pay on the extraction of gas, which was later approved by parliament, was the first time in many years when the company’s fiscal privileges were withdrawn. The process of Gazprom’s assets being taken over by private companies and business partners from within Vladimir Putin’s closest circle is underway. More and more frequently attempts are being made to challenge the company’s monopoly in areas of key importance for the functioning of the entire gas sector, such as Gazprom’s exclusive right to dispose of the Russian gas transportation system and its exports monopoly. Competition from independent gas producers on the domestic market is growing, and Gazprom is gradually being pushed out of some of that market’s most profitable segments (industrial clients). The emerging tendencies in the Russian gas sector derive from a number of factors – from the situation on the European gas market, through difficulties hampering the development of the sector in Russia itself, to the private interests of the current ruling class and its business partners. The plans for a structural reform of the monopoly (including isolating gas transportation system from Gazprom), presented since 2000 by the Ministry for Economic Development and since 2003 by the Russian Association of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP), suggest a direction for the changes necessary to stimulate the sector’s development and improve the efficiency of Gazprom itself. However, the monopolist’s current business model gives the government full control over this strategic enterprise, which is a core of Putin’s concept for developing Russia as a global energy power. Despite Putin’s recent statement that he “does not rule out privatising Gazprom in the future” (made at a meeting with political scientists in Moscow on 6 February this year), any structural reform of Gazprom (and consequently, a weakening of the state’s control over it) seems unlikely in the foreseeable future. Still, the developments on the domestic market – growing pressure from other gas companies (oil corporations and independent producers) and changes on the European market2 – may result in the weakening of Gazprom’s monopoly privileges and a gradual deterioration of its special status within Russia.
Resumo:
This paper describes and compares the institutional framework of the agricultural credit markets in selected European countries. The institutions can be both formal (rules, regulations, authorities and actors) and informal (norms, values and relations). They also interact and in situations where the formal institutions are weak, the informal ones increase in importance. The study is based on a questionnaire sent to agricultural financial experts in selected countries. The case studies show that credit regulations are typically general, with no specific regulations for the agricultural credit market. On the other hand, several countries support agricultural credit in various forms, implying that the governments do not perceive the general credit market to function in the case of agricultural firms. In a risk assessment, the most frequent reasons for rejecting a loan application are all linked to economic performance and the situation of the farmer. Personal characteristics, such as educational level or lack of experience, were generally perceived as less influential. Another interesting point when it comes to risk assessment is that in some countries the importance of asset-based lending compared with cash flow-based lending seems to differ when concerning a first-time applicant and when there is an application to extend a loan. To get an idea of the availability of credit, the loan-to-value (LTV) ratio was calculated, and it showed remarkably low values for Poland and Slovakia. For all the countries, the calculated value was lower than what the financial experts would have expected. This might imply credit rationing in agriculture in some of the countries studied. The financial experts all judged the possibility of an agricultural firm obtaining a loan as higher than that for other small rural firms, implying that the latter are also credit-rationed.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
"April 1957."
Resumo:
"December 1955."
Resumo:
"June 1956."
Resumo:
"January 1956."
Resumo:
"November 1959."
Resumo:
"October 1955."
Resumo:
Chiefly tables.