Выбор редакции
23 марта, 21:29

Renewable Energy Subsidies -- Yes or No?

Whether the government should continue to subsidize renewable energy is more complicated than it might sound. The answer, ultimately, comes down to what you believe, both about the risks of fossil fuels and about global needs and policies.

23 марта, 19:12

Here’s What’s in the Budget Bill Nobody’s Bothered to Read

No wonder Trump is threatening a veto—Democrats are getting most of what they wanted.

23 марта, 02:00

GOP Congress rebuffs Trump and goes on a spending spree

A Republican-led Congress is on the verge of passing a mammoth spending bill that broadly rejects the Trump administration’s attempts to downsize the federal government and even surpasses former President Barack Obama’s requests.The $1.3 trillion bill, H.R. 1625 (115), is stuffed with new cash for programs that President Donald Trump and his Cabinet have protested — national parks, renewable energy programs, the Army Corps of Engineers — while delighting Democratic leaders.“This spending agreement brings that era of austerity to an unceremonious end and represents one of the most significant investments in the middle class in decades,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer declared on the floor.Among the winners in the congressional spending spree in the so-called omnibus package:AGRICULTUREUSDA and the FDA would get $23.3 billion in discretionary funding, despite the White House’s calls for billions in cuts.And Food for Peace, a food aid program that Trump wanted to eliminate, would get extra money, totaling $1.7 billion. ARTSFunding for the National Endowment for the Arts — which Trump’s budget would have cut — increases to $152.8 million. The National Gallery of Art gets $165.9 million, while the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts receives $40.5 million, both far above Trump’s request.EDUCATIONThe measure doesn’t include a single dollar for the private school vouchers that Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has made a key part of her tenure.DeVos’ budget also proposed eliminating a $1.1 billion program for after-school programs. The omnibus not only rejected zeroing out the programs, but boosted them by $20 million to $1.2 billion.The Trump budget also called for cutting the Federal Work-Study program in half — the omnibus instead gave it a $140 million boost.The bill would block key parts of the Education Department’s effort to overhaul how it collects federal student loans. It also boosts the funding for the Office of Civil Rights, which is in charge of investigating discrimination in schools. Appropriators said the money should be used for additional staff. The Trump administration has worked to shrink the office, which advocates complained was already understaffed.ENVIRONMENTThe budget for the Environmental Protection Agency — which the White House sought to slash by one-third — escapes unscathed.HEALTHThe National Institutes of Health, instead of seeing its budget shrink by $5.8 billion, will get a $3 billion increase — which lawmakers say is the largest ever.Funding for the health department’s Title X grants program — called “America’s family planning program” — remains stable despite Trump’s proposal to eliminate it. (The administration is shifting the program’s to emphasize so-called natural family planning rather than traditional contraception.)The Trump administration's proposed a 95 percent cut to the Office of National Drug Control Policy was rejected in the omnibus. Congress keeps funding flat for the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT office. Trump had proposed to slice its budget from $60 million to $38 million. The White House in February proposed to cut the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health — CDC’s office dedicated to workplace health — by 41 percent and fold it into the National Institutes of Health. Congressional appropriators, meanwhile, trimmed the office’s $338 million budget by $3 million, or a less than 1 percent cut.HOUSINGCommunity Development Block Grants would get a 10 increase funding increase in the omnibus. The Trump administration proposed to completely zero out its budget.IMMIGRATION The spending bill contains no major investment for a border wall with Mexico. There’s also no crackdown on so-called sanctuary cities that harbor undocumented immigrants.TRANSPORTATIONInstead of eliminating a key grant program for transportation projects, the omnibus triples the funding to $1.5 billion.The bill appropriates $2.6 billion for Capital Investment Grants for transit, which Trump’s budget wanted to wind down.Trump wanted to cut the law enforcement reimbursement program for airports. The omnibus includes funding for that, too.Kaitlyn Burton, Dan Diamond, Tanya Snyder, Alex Guillen, Benjamin Wermund, Andrew Hanna, Michael Stratford, Catherine Boudreau and Liz Crampton contributed to this report.

22 марта, 22:47

4 ETFs to Join The Sustainable Investing Trend

Socially responsible investing has been gaining steam lately. There are multiple ETFs offering exposure to stocks doing their bit with regard to the betterment of the society.

22 марта, 16:50

Impact of Fed Rate Hike on Canada: 4 Stocks to Beat the Heat

Much of the Canadian economy depends on the United States as it accounts for nearly three-fourth of its total exports.

22 марта, 16:11

The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Royal Dutch, Statoil, Eni, McDermott and Petrobras

The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Royal Dutch, Statoil, Eni, McDermott and Petrobras

22 марта, 13:11

Bill Blain: "What Struck Me Is What A Monster Facebook Has Become"

Submitted by Bill Blain of Mint Partners Blain's Morning Porridge - March 22nd 2018 "Gybe: To shift suddenly and forcibly from one side to the other.." Headwinds have become tailwinds, and Jay Powell opens his tenure at the FED by upgrading the outlook for the US Economy. As a keen sailor, I have more than a passing interest in from where the wind is blowing. There are a number of things to bear in mind about tailwinds; i) they get you where you expect to go faster – meaning we shouldn’t neglect thinking about how this Goldilocks recovery ends. And, ii) sailing downwind (ie tailwinds) can prove the most dangerous point of sail – things can go from smooth and stable to disaster in frighteningly short moments as a result of a sudden windshift causing a crash-gybe to flick the crew into the water, or the mast to come tumbling down. I’ve attached a photo showing just how bad tailwind sailing can go…. The Fed’s message was simple: stronger growth, lower but stable full employment, modestly rising inflation, and rates set to double to double to 3.4% in 2020. Three, maybe four hikes this year, but three next year…. It should not have come as much of a surprise to the market. Some of the news reports say it was “Aggressive”, but what I heard was a dovish “middle-ground” back-loading of further tightening – further hikes to follow if justified. They are not slamming on the breaks, but gently brushing the pedals. Powell summed it up nicely: “The economy is healthier than it has been since before the crisis…” Cynics might ask which particular crisis? The world is an increasingly volatile place – a blusterous conflabulation of sentiment, facts, hopes and expectations that tends to spin very differently to Central Bankers scripts. Perhaps its a modern update Chinese curse, but we live in “unconventional” times – while the Fed is considering tightening policy, the government is looking to Spend, Spend, Spend. We should be keeping a tight eye on employment – with the economy already looking inside NAIRU – how will tax-cuts and fiscal spending impact already tight labour costs? Meanwhile, what about the global economy? What about Populism? Or geopolitics and the threats of a trade-war with China? What about so many other unforseen things…. As we charge downhill with the spinnaker flying, just how stable is that mast? Next on my worry list this morning is Facebook. I was out with someone who knows about this kind of stuff – my 23 year old son Jack who is making a career for himself in advertising (and directing music videos in his spare time!). He explained it’s not just Cambridge Analytica that’s been exploiting Facebook and other social media sites through deep diving apps that amuse us with puppy pics, while measuring and tailoring product and messages to our desires and weaknesses.. Its happening across the board – it’s a dimly understood marketing revolution. We just don’t realise how social media users aren’t customers – we’re the product! It was a light-bulb moment… Almost as revealing as Mark Zuckerberg’s dollar-late appearance last night on CNN. What struck me is that he has as little idea as the rest of us what a monster Facebook has become. Sure, he took responsibility – but does he actually understand what for? You can’t uninvent stuff – but last night I deep dived my social media pages, changed all the options, put in new passwords and wonder just what a mess we’ve created. Back in the real world – or is it? Some interesting thoughts on alternative assets yesterday. According to some US research, global investors now hold around 25% of their total assets – accounting to some $7 trillion – in the form of Alternatives – ie things that aren’t “financial assets” such as stocks and shares. We’re very aware that assets like property tend to yield significantly more than financial assets – properly reflecting their lesser liquidity, but also how stocks and bonds have tightened and become inflated as a result of QE policies. I was reading stuff about how much investors should demand for illiquidity – a base guess being a 1% spread over the risk free rate if you are locked into an illiquid alternative asset for one year rising to 6% for 10-yrs plus. Others say managers should be earning at least a 3% illiquidity premium on illiquid alternatives to justify themselves. The trick is finding the right people to manage alternatives – for instance a global aircraft leasing firm or a firm with a fleet of ships under management, with all the technical and professional management skills to understand why planes fly and ships float, while also making sure they are working hard to earn a return. Or guys who understand the intricacies of private equity. There aren’t that many conventional bond/equity long/short portfolio managers who’ve got a breeze of an idea on which particular renewable energy projects beats the rest – but there are specialists who do. One approach is to find the right experts to invest on fund’s behalf – and we’ve got such managers we recommend. That said, the research note yesterday made the case that many investors are utterly unprepared for illiquidity risks of alternative / illiquid assets. While the best case is to plan and hold illiquid alternatives through to maturity, its equally important to plan for need – have a plan to sell if you have to. That said, I think I’ll stick with my 2018 investment strategy: buy assets correlated to global growth, and avoid correlation with inflated liquid assets.

Выбор редакции
22 марта, 02:30

5 Top Picks As The Lithium Race Heats Up

The twentieth century was the age of oil. Could the twenty-first be the age of lithium? It’s definitely starting to look that way. The lithium market is one of the fastest-growing commodity markets in the world. The market for batteries is set to grow to $120 billion over the next two years, fueled by the massive new demand for electric vehicles (EV) and battery-powered tech. The boom in renewable energy sources, which need lithium-batteries to compete at cost with fossil-fuels, should only add fuel to the fire. Tesla, the industry leader…

22 марта, 01:57

BP Elects Susan Dio to Head Extensive U.S. Operations

BP's US-based businesses contribute to $88.7 billion, reflecting almost 34% of the company's total sales and other operating revenues.

21 марта, 21:48

Oil & Gas Stock Roundup: Shell Quits New Zealand, Statoil to Become Equinor

Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A) decided to end its association in New Zealand by selling its business for $578 million, while Norway-based Statoil (STO) plans to change its name to Equinor.

21 марта, 19:56

Tesla Stock Pops As Musk's Compensation Plan Awaits Approval

Shares of Tesla (TSLA) rose over 2.5% in morning trading ahead of the company's vote on a relatively unprecedented compensation package for CEO Elon Musk. But which way do shareholders hope the vote goes? Let's take a closer look.

21 марта, 17:34

Oil & Gas Stock Roundup: Shell Quits New Zealand, Statoil to Become Equinor

Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A) decided to end its association in New Zealand by selling its business for $578 million, while Norway-based Statoil (STO) plans to change its name to Equinor.

21 марта, 17:10

Eversource's Capital Project & Acquisitions to Drive Growth

Eversource Energy (ES) is poised to benefit from investments made to strengthen its infrastructure. Acquisition of water assets is going to further expand its revenue base.

Выбор редакции
21 марта, 07:42

Why Sanjeev Gupta May Just Be The World's Most Ambitious Industrialist

In the last five years, Indian-born industrialist Sanjeev Gupta has emerged from relative anonymity to amass a global empire spanning and spending billions as he stages a bet that he can modernize steel production using renewable energy. Could he be the world's most ambitious industrialist?

20 марта, 23:13

Here's Why You Should Buy Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A) Now

Shell's (RDS.A) shares have returned 17.1% in a year, outperforming 7.4% gain of the industry it belongs to.

20 марта, 21:05

Nixon kicks off campaign with blistering attack on Cuomo's record

Cynthia Nixon's first official day on the campaign trail got a little boost from the failing subway system that she has already made a central issue in her underdog fight to oust Gov. Andrew Cuomo.At about 10:45 a.m. Tuesday — 15 minutes before she was scheduled to make her official campaign announcement one stop and a short walk away — Nixon stood on the subway platform at Utica Avenue, looking around with resignation. She was having an experience common among New Yorkers these days: The 3 train that would take her to her final stop at Sutter Avenue was not running. In fact, two consecutive 3 trains had been pulled out of service, because of a sick passenger.One woman got off a train coming from the other direction, talked a moment with Nixon, and told her, “I’m voting for you, definitely.”Aside from picking up a vote, the delay also provided a convenient opening for Nixon in the attack she had in store moments later inside the Bethesda Healing Center, a small Pentecostal church in Brownsville where Nixon chose to officially kick off her campaign. “I got here just in the nick of time. I allowed an hour and a half for what should have been a 30 minute ride — Cuomo’s MTA," she told a crowd of about 50 people. "Three trains pulled out of service. We had to get off three trains. I’m glad I’m here. I’m glad you’re all here."Her dig at Cuomo’s handling of the subway system was just the beginning.On her first full day as a candidate, Nixon launched into a blistering attack on Cuomo’s tenure as New York’s governor, calling him a fake Democrat who’d failed to live up to the promises he campaigned on when he first ran for office, and offering herself up as the alternative to his particular brand. In a brief speech, delivered from behind a podium with a paper “Cynthia for NY” flyer tacked up to it, Nixon told the room that she’d voted for Cuomo eight years ago “because I believed that he was a real Democrat.” She attacked his tacit approval for the IDC, a group of renegade Democrats who’ve conferenced with Senate Republicans for years. And she took aim at an obscure deal that has long haunted the Senate Democrats in Albany — Cuomo’s rumored bargain with Senate Republicans in 2010 to allow them to draw their own district maps, all but ensuring they’d stay in power in the state Senate for the next decade, despite an overwhelming Democratic enrollment advantage across the state.That maneuver, Nixon said, suppressed “Democratic voters, most especially Democratic voters of color." “And with these two moves, Andrew Cuomo gave the Republican party in New York state the power to block almost all of our big Democratic legislative priorities,” she said. She questioned Cuomo's record as a centrist Democrat, who governed for much of his first term from the moderate, Clintonian wing of the Democratic party, maintaining close ties with major corporations and avoiding tax hikes. She called his budgets “inhumane” and argued he’d ignored the state’s infrastructure and mass transit needs. She attacked him over his ethics, particularly the recent conviction of his former top aide Joe Percoco on federal corruption charges, calling Albany “a cesspool.”“New York’s eight years under the Cuomo administration have been an exercise in living with disappointment, dysfunction and dishonesty,” she said. “Andrew Cuomo promised to clean up Albany but instead he and his cronies have cleaned up for themselves. There is a reason that people close to Andrew Cuomo keep winding up under indictment for corruption. His right hand man Joe Percoco was just convicted of selling his office to the highest bidder." Under Cuomo, she said the state had become even more unequal, with the gap between the incomes of the wealthy and the poor widening. “Let me tell you about this kind of crushing inequality. This is not something that just happens by mistake. It comes from a choice. It comes from a choice to slash taxes for corporations and the super rich and slash services on everybody else," she said. "And It’s a choice we’re used to being made by Republicans like Donald Trump. But for the past eight years it’s a choice that has been made by our governor Andrew Cuomo.”“Since taking office Andrew Cuomo has given massive tax breaks to corporations and the super rich while he has decimated our infrastructure and starved our state, its cities and its rural areas of their most basic services,” she said. Nixon pledged to fund her campaign without taking corporate donations, drawing a stark contrast with Cuomo, who she said had built a “$31 million war chest with the donations of millionaires, billionaires and corporations.”“Do you know how much of that came from small donors? 0.1 percent. If you’re a regular person in New York, the chance that Andrew Cuomo is going to care about your concerns is exactly that — 0.1 percent,” she said. Cuomo, she argued, has stymied the hopes of progressive Democrats across the state. “We could have fully funded our public schools. We could have enacted campaign finance reform. We could have enacted the Women's Equality Agenda and the New York Dream Act. We could have fixed our subways, strengthened rent control and become a leader in renewable energy,” she said. “I am running for governor because I want these things for New York and New Yorkers. We want our state back. We want it to work again," she said. "We are tired of corruption and dysfunction in Albany. We are tired of fake corporate Democrats who won't lift a finger unless their donors say it's OK.”Nixon was surrounded by a crush of cameras and reporters as she finished her speech, but a 59-year-old certified nursing assistant and New York Communities for Change activist from Ditmas Park named Winsome Pendergrass stopped her first, to talk about rising rents.“We will fight for you girlfriend, we will pull for you girlfriend,” Pendergrass said. “But we’re begging you, don’t screw us over.”Pendergrass later told reporters she thought Nixon’s candidacy was “wonderful” and “a breath of fresh air.”Nixon took a handful of questions as she made her way out of the church. One was how she’d fix the subway system.“We can’t just find the money that’s in the budget as it exists now,” Nixon said. “We need a dedicated stream of revenue to fund the subway.”Asked if she supported congestion pricing or a millionaire’s tax to fund the subway, ideas put forth by Cuomo and de Blasio, respectively, she replied, cryptically, “I think both of those are good ideas.”Her lack of experience in government? Not a problem, she said. “It’s time for an outsider.”The outsider label had already been deployed by the Cuomo team earlier in the day, giving Nixon a taste of the attacks she may face in the coming months.Former New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a surrogate for Cuomo, told the New York Post on Tuesday morning that Nixon's candidacy was "a flight of fancy on her part,” and attacked her as an "unqualified lesbian."“Cynthia Nixon was opposed to having a qualified lesbian become mayor of New York City. Now she wants to be an unqualified lesbian to be the governor of New York. You have to be qualified and have experience. She isn’t qualified to be the governor,” Quinn said. “My being a lesbian or her being a lesbian has nothing to do with why we’re running for office," Nixon responded when asked for comment Tuesday.In the back of the room at the Bethesda Healing Center, 66-year old Norman Frazier, a Brownsville resident, said he’d decided to come to the campaign rollout after hearing about it Tuesday morning from people in the neighborhood. “I heard on the news about her issues — housing, homeless, education. I said 'I got to get out here.'”Asked if he had voted for Cuomo for governor previously, Frazier said, “Yes I did.”“That’s why I’m so disappointed,” he offered. “And I feel like he threw us under the bus with the subway system, the housing system, the homeless system. So I am so disappointed in him.” Frazier, who said he has lived in Brownsville for 50 years, said he thought Cuomo had been scarce in the neighborhood. “I can’t remember, as long as I’ve been in Brownsville, Cuomo coming to Brownsville.”A spokesman for Cuomo's campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Выбор редакции
20 марта, 21:00

Subsidy-free renewable energy projects set to soar in UK, analysts say

Falling cost of wind and solar will unlock £20bn of investment, Aurora Energy Research saysThe UK is well on the way to a new era of subsidy-free renewable energy projects that will largely kill off prospects for new gas power stations, according to industry analysts.The falling cost of wind and solar projects combined with advances in battery storage technology will unlock about £20bn of investment in the UK between now and 2030, Aurora Energy Research said. Onshore wind and solar will both be viable without subsidies by 2025 in the UK, it added. Continue reading...

20 марта, 18:25

New Strong Buy Stocks for March 20th

New Strong Buy Stocks for March 20th

Выбор редакции
20 марта, 17:10

Arsenal FC Using 100% Renewable Energy Via Startup That Aims To Shake-Up U.K. Market

In an exclusive interview, Greg Jackson, founder and CEO of Octopus Energy, says the English soccer club’s move accentuates a march to renewables by major sporting brands.

20 марта, 03:01

Rabat banks on renewables for European power exports

Morocco is taking a lead in the promotion of renewable energy in North Africa, aiming to develop wind and solar to meet both domestic electricity demand and export power to Europe. Interconnectors to Spain and Portugal are under consideration. Morocco has a considerable geographic advantage when it come to exporting power to Europe; the Strait […] The post Rabat banks on renewables for European power exports appeared first on The Barrel Blog.

27 ноября 2014, 12:39

Почему Google отказалась от "зеленой" энергетики

Несколько лет назад компания Google инициировала амбициозный энергетический проект. Но даже мастеру инноваций современной эпохи не удалось найти реальную замену углю и другим ископаемым источникам топлива. Целью проекта RE

10 июня 2014, 09:23

Налоги на нефть. Mother Jones

Обсуждение налогов на добычу полезных ископаемых, а также льгот в этой области зачастую оказывается значимой частью политической полемики. Эту тему энергично освещают СМИ; она же в ряде случаев фигурирует как знаковый момент политической или активистской риторики. В США последняя волна налоговых льгот в недавней истории пришлась на 1995 г., когда цены на нефть упали настолько, что вложения в отрасль стали казаться невыгодными. Чтобы дать стимул к развитию нефтедобычи, правительство стало вводить налоговые льготы, вплоть до полного устранения налогов для тех, кто разрабатывал нерентабельные или низкорентабельные месторождения (например, глубоководные). В результате эти льготы продолжают действовать в отношении разработок, начавшихся в период с 1996 по 2000 г. Властям США в условиях бюджетного дефицита такие льготы в настоящее время очень невыгодны, тем более что цены на нефть, с тех пор как льготы были введены, выросли в десятки раз. В связи с этим тема устранения этих льгот обсуждается регулярно. В 2013 г., например, за нее энергично взялся [1] конгрессмен Эдвард Марки (Edward Markey, демократ из Массачусетса), член Комитета по природным ресурсам. Он, в частности, подсчитал, что если бы налоговые льготы отменили сразу после того, как цены на нефть начали расти, то общий доход бюджету от налогов, выплачиваемых нефтяными компаниями, мог бы составить порядка $11 млрд. Входящие в состав Комитета демократы выпустили отчет, в котором сообщалось, что около 25% нефти, добываемой только в Мексиканском заливе в настоящий момент не подлежит налогообложению, то есть более 100 нефтегазовых компаний арендуют не менее 200 не облагаемых налогом нефтеносных участков. По их прогнозам, если снять льготы, то за следующие 10 лет дополнительный доход бюджета составит порядка $15,5 млрд. Нефтяные компании, в свою очередь, стали высказываться резко против этой инициативы Комитета. В частности, они сразу стали апеллировать к тому, что устранение льгот приведет к сокращению объемов нефтедобычи, так как у компаний пропадет стимул к разработке труднодоступных месторождений, а дохода федеральному бюджету, соответственно, не прибавится. Еще один распространенный аргумент [2] состоит в том, что уплата налогов в итоге ляжет не на корпорации, а на плечи конечного потребителя, который будет больше платить за нефтепродукты . Компромисс до сих пор не был найден, и полемика продолжается. В апреле 2014 г. был опубликован большой материал [3] в левом некоммерческом издании Mother Jones, которое, конечно, поддерживает отмену льгот для крупных корпораций. Авторы, в частности, приводят следующие цифры. За последние сто лет федеральное правительство вложило в нефтегазовую отрасль более $470 млрд. в виде налоговых льгот, которые «первоначально были призваны поддержать американских нефтяников, а потом превратились в чистый бонус для самых доходных в мире компаний». При этом налогоплательщики сейчас спонсируют нефтедобычу в размере примерно $4,8 млрд. в год, из которых половина идет пяти крупным нефтяным компаниям (ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP и ConocoPhillips). Их льготный налог в среднем составляет $3,34 за баррель, притом что цены на нефть превысили $100 за баррель. Авторы также отмечают, что со времени введения первых государственных субсидий для нефтедобывающих компаний (это произошло в 1916 г.) вопрос о непропорциональном распределении налоговой нагрузки поднимался неоднократно – преимущественно при президентах-демократах. В частности, приводится высказывание Гарри Трумэна, который назвал правила взимания налогов с нефтедобывающих компаний самой вопиющей дырой в системе налогообложения. Тем не менее, вплоть до настоящего момента нефтяники удерживают за собой льготы. Технически говоря, они сейчас действительно ничего не получают от государства, помимо налоговых поблажек, а для того чтобы отменить их, нужно изменить законодательство. Когда цены на нефть после 1998 г. только начали расти, министерство внутренних дел США (DOI - iv_g) попыталось ввести ограничения на льготы, поставив порог в $28 за баррель, после которого льготы считались недействительными. Большинство компаний последовали этому требованию, однако корпорация Kerr McGee, которую позднее купила Anadarko, подала на министерство в суд на том основании, что у него не было права вводить такие ограничения. Kerr McGee выиграла процесс, после чего все компании, уже выплатившие налоги, получили эти средства обратно. Больше подобных инициатив пока не было. Британские нефтяные компании сейчас энергично разрабатывают месторождения в Северном море. Прибыль с этого они начали получать во второй половине 1970-х гг., а в середине 1980-х гг. наступил первый пик их доходности, составившей более 3% национального дохода. По некоторым подсчетам, с начала разработок к настоящему моменту доход государству должен составить 850 млрд. фунтов. В отличие от США, полемика о налоговых льготах в области добычи нефти в Соединенном Королевстве не настолько острая. Стимулирующие льготы там обычно встраиваются в бюджетный план на предстоящий год. Это, конечно, тоже может быть поводом для возмущения, но менее массового. В частности, когда в 2012 г. ряд компаний, в том числе BP, получили льготы [4] на разработку глубоководных месторождений к северу от Шотландии, это вызвало недовольство у экологов и сторонников зеленых движений. Оно было вызвано тем, что нефтяные компании не просто получили разрешение на проведение своих неэкологичных работ (особенно BP, отметившаяся в 2010 г. тем, что разлила в Мексиканском заливе нефть и устроила там экологическую катастрофу), но еще и удостоились за это вознаграждения. Всерьез тема налогов на добычу нефти стала обсуждаться в британской прессе – также, в первую очередь, с позиции политического противостояния – в 2014 г. Поводом послужило поступившее в январе сообщение [5] норвежского национального Пенсионного фонда о том, что каждый норвежец стал потенциальным миллионером, так как объемы фонда достиг 5 трлн. крон, в миллион раз превысив численность населения страны (около 5 млн. человек). В 1990 г. был создан Нефтяной фонд, куда стали поступать налоги из нефтегазовой отрасли (в том числе налоги на добычу). Позднее он был объединен с Пенсионным фондом, в результате чего получился такой эффект. Естественно, граждане не могут просто прийти в фонд и забрать деньги. Однако известно, что эти средства идут на обеспечение гражданских нужд, в том числе строительство дорог и обеспечение отопления. По подсчетам экспертов [6], доход от нефтяных налогов на душу населения в Великобритании, конечно, был бы меньше - с учетом большей численности населения, однако всё равно составил бы около 13 000 фунтов на человека. Но ничего в этой сфере не изменилось, и ни о каком использовании этих средств для прямого обеспечения гражданских нужд речи не идет. Эти средства шли и продолжают идти на установление налоговых льгот для крупных корпораций вне нефтяной сферы. Левые комментаторы ставят это в упрек консервативным правительством, по чьей инициативе это было организовано так. Их оппоненты указывают на общественную полезность стимулирования развития бизнеса http://www.oilru.com/news/412616/ http://polit.ru/article/2014/06/01/oil_royalty/ 1/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/lawmaker-attacks-oil-companies-free-drilling-in-gulf/2013/02/26/cc55014a-806a-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html 2/ http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2014/04/californians-already-pay-oil-severance-tax-states/  3/ http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/oil-subsidies-renewable-energy-tax-breaks 4/ http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/mar/21/budget-2012-oil-industry-tax 5/ http://www.radioazadlyg.ru/content/article/25225524.html 6/ http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/north-sea-oil-money-uk-norwegians-fund  - - - - Выжимка из статьи i/ В США последняя волна налоговых льгот в недавней истории пришлась на 1995 г., когда цены на нефть упали настолько, что вложения в отрасль стали казаться невыгодными. Чтобы дать стимул к развитию нефтедобычи, правительство стало вводить налоговые льготы, вплоть до полного устранения налогов для тех, кто разрабатывал нерентабельные или низкорентабельные месторождения (например, глубоководные). В результате эти льготы продолжают действовать в отношении разработок, начавшихся в период с 1996 по 2000 г. ii/ около 25% нефти, добываемой только в Мексиканском заливе в настоящий момент не подлежит налогообложению, то есть более 100 нефтегазовых компаний арендуют не менее 200 не облагаемых налогом нефтеносных участков. iii/ если снять льготы, то за следующие 10 лет дополнительный доход бюджета составит порядка $15,5 млрд. iv/ За последние сто лет федеральное правительство вложило в нефтегазовую отрасль более $470 млрд. в виде налоговых льгот v/ налогоплательщики сейчас спонсируют нефтедобычу в размере примерно $4,8 млрд. в год, из которых половина идет пяти крупным нефтяным компаниям (ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP и ConocoPhillips). Их льготный налог в среднем составляет $3,34 за баррель, притом что цены на нефть превысили $100 за баррель. Выводы i/ Убивать курицу, несущую золотые яйца, чтобы получить в среднем прибавку $1,5 млрд. в год неразумно. ii/ Налоговые льготы за 100 лет в среднем $4,7 млрд. в год, вероятно, большая часть в последние 20 лет. Очень немного, принимая во внимание мультиплицирующий эффект на экономику и значительную степень выработанности запасов - - - - Mother Jones Mother Jones (abbreviated MoJo) is an American magazine featuring investigative and breaking news reporting on politics, the environment, human rights, and culture. First issue February 1976 Company Foundation For National Progress http://www.motherjones.com/search/apachesolr_search/oil Jan. 2, 2013 Big Oil's Billions in Tax Perks Survive Fiscal Cliff Deal http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/01/big-oil-tax-subsidy-fiscal-cliff Apr. 14, 2014 A Brief History of Big Tax Breaks for Oil Companies http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/oil-subsidies-energy-timeline  Oil derricks and a "lake" of spilled crude in Santa Barbara, California, in 1935. Associated Press      Chart sources Estimated Annual Tax Breaks for the Big Five: Center for American Progress Estimated Tax Break per Barrel of Oil Produced in US: Calculation based on companies' SEC filings and Center for American Progress data Total Tax Breaks…/Average Annual Tax Breaks: DBL Investors (PDF), Congressional Budget Office (PDF) Political Giving Center for Responsive Politics Federal Lobbying: Center for Responsive Politics Campaign Spending by Top 20 Donors: Center for Responsive Politics Energy Tax Breaks: Congressional Budget Office (PDF) Where Our Energy Comes From: Energy Information Administration http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/oil-subsidies-renewable-energy-tax-breaks  О диаграммах i/ Налоговые льготы ВИЭ весьма существенны ii/ Лоббирование ВИЭ значительно, особенно если посмотреть как долю от продаж iii/ Сравнивать 2005 и 2011 не совсем корректно. 2005 - пик добычи традиционной нефти в мире и в отдельных компаниях iv/ Журнал демократов ведет кампанию против нефтяных компаний, которые плохо финансируют демократов. И более благосклонен к ВИЭ, которые приносят демократам больше, чем республиканцам v/ Налоговые льготы ВИЭ весьма существенны особенно если сравнивать объем льгот и производство энергии. На максимуме в 2008 г. налоговые льготы на ВИЭ превосходили все льготы на ископаемое топливо в более чем в 5 раз, а сейчас превосходят более чем в 2раза.

18 февраля 2014, 14:14

Успехи Техаса и США: нефть и газ животворящие :)

Richard W. Fisher, President and CEOFederal Reserve Bank of DallasDallas, Texas February 11, 2014             - - - - - - - 05 Февраль 2014 О ценах на газ в США http://iv-g.livejournal.com/997777.html   23 Октябрь 2013 U.S. Natural Gas Proved Reserves, 2011. 2 http://iv-g.livejournal.com/956077.html   28 Август 2013 McKinsey: Five opportunities for US growth and renewal (Energy) http://iv-g.livejournal.com/931584.html  26 Август 2013 API.org: Инфографика о добыче сланцевых нефти и газа. 2 http://iv-g.livejournal.com/931067.html   24 Август 2013 API.org: Инфографика о добыче сланцевых нефти и газа http://iv-g.livejournal.com/929565.html   17 Январь 2013 IEA: World Energy Outlook 2012. Presentation to the press http://iv-g.livejournal.com/818512.html  26 Декабрь 2012 forbes: Влияние нетрадиционных газа и нефти на экономику США http://iv-g.livejournal.com/806390.html   25 Июль 2012 Занятость в США и добыча углеводородов http://iv-g.livejournal.com/715320.html     28 Март 2012 Citigroup report. Energy 2020: North America as the new Middle East http://iv-g.livejournal.com/633928.html