Connect with us

Business

Coal washing not mandatory for supply to thermal plants: Environment min

Published

on



Five years after the government, in laying down its climate-change targets, committed to have mandatory coal washing, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has done away with it.


In a gazette notification on Thursday, the ministry amended the Environment Protection Act to drop mandatorily washing coal for supply to thermal power plants.

Advertisement


“Use of coal by Thermal Power Plants, without stipulations as regards ash content or distance shall be permitted,” said the gazette notification.


Business Standard has reviewed the gazette notification. In 2015, as part of its climate-change commitments, the government had made coal washing mandatory for supply to all thermal units more than 500 km from the coal mine.


ALSO READ: ESIC social security scheme sees around 821,000 enrolments in March

Advertisement


This was in keeping with India’s stand to not reduce coal consumption but rather focus on emission control.


The ministry, in its guidelines issued the same year, said “power stations located 500-750 km, 750-1,000 km would be supplied coal with ash content not exceeding 34 per cent on a quarterly average basis w.e.f January 01, 2016”. It asked the coal companies to supply washed/blended or beneficiated coal.


The move to abolish coal washing has come barely 15 days after the ministry issued a draft note for stakeholders to submit their views on this.

Advertisement


ALSO READ: Cabinet approves new methodology for awarding commercial coal mines


The gazette notification cited the ministry, which said speedy legislative action was needed in wake of the pandemic. “(The) ministry has represented that in view of the existing unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic …, it is desirable to issue the notification at the earliest,” said the notification.


The ministry is of the view that the requirement of maintaining an average ash content of 34 per cent prompts industries to import, resulting in an outflow of foreign exchange.

Advertisement


The ministry in a separate policy proposal has asked the thermal power sector to source coal domestically.


This paper had reported the ministry had proposed doing away with coal washing because it did not bring down the ash content in coal.


According to industry calculations, washing improves the quality of coal by reducing ash content to 33-34 per cent from the earlier 40-45 in average Indian coal.

Advertisement


ALSO READ: Demand, supply chain disruption may see pvt manufacturing shrinking in FY21


The ministry has instead directed thermal power plants to install the technology for handling ash content.


Earlier the ministry had advocated pollution-control technologies such as Flue Gas Desulphurization (FGD) at the end of power generation units. Several industry executives had contested it, saying it was not an alternative to coal washing.

Advertisement


FGD at thermal stations is mandatory under the new emission control norms, 2015. A report by the Centre for Science & Environment (CSE) recently said 70 per cent of India’s coal-powered capacity would miss the FGD deadline of 2022.


The coal-washing industry is up in arms against the notification. Several representatives said the ministry did not acknowledge their response to the earlier draft note contesting the decision.


“As stakeholders in the coal washing industry, we had submitted our contentions to the MoEFFC. Neither physical nor emailed copies of our views were acknowledged by the ministry,” said an executive not wanting to be named.

Advertisement


The thermal power would also be mandated to comply with ash utilisation notifications issued by the ministry and also install appropriate technology solutions to optimise water consumption for ash management,” said the gazette.


ALSO READ: Retail, MSME loans to get cheaper as RBI cuts repo rate in surprise action


During 2019-20 (first half), of 105 coal based units monitored by the government, only 39 had 100 per cent ash utilisation at their end, according to data by Central Electricity Authority. Medical councils globally consider fly ash as a health hazard leading to severe lung and breathing diseases.

Advertisement

Advertisement

(Note: This is a Article Automatically Generated Through Syndication, Here is The Original Source

Passionate news enthusiast with a flair for words. Our Editorial Team author brings you the latest updates, in-depth analysis, and engaging stories. Stay informed with their well-researched articles.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

World

New Class-Action Lawsuit Accuses Rivian of Making Materially False and Misleading Statements

Published

on

New Class-Action Lawsuit Accuses Rivian of Making Materially False and Misleading Statements

Electric vehicle manufacturer Rivian has been slapped with a lawsuit which alleged that the company misled the investors with false claims regarding its business, operations and prospects.

The class-action lawsuit made a number of allegations which included overstating the demand of its Electric vehicles and also not making it clear how it will handle the negative and near-term macroeconomic impacts.

The lawsuit also revealed that Rivian’s business was experiencing reduced demands as well as increased customer cancellations precipitated by inter alia, high interest rates.

Advertisement

The orders had significantly reduced and this has significantly reduced the profits and the manufacturing of vehicles in 2024.

Rivian Faces New Class-Action Lawsuit Alleging Deceptive Statements

The lawsuit also alleged that the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

Rivian’s stock, like all other EV startups, has been tanking and this has angered the investors who saw a major portion of their investments eroded and a number of law firms like Bernstein Liebhard LLP announced this week that it has filed a securities class action lawsuit on investors’ behalf.

Advertisement

The lawsuit stated that the EV manufacturer had violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and has asked investors who had bought shares of Rivian Automotive, Inc. between March 1, 2023, and February 21, 2024, to join its suit.

The company’s stocks have fallen and one of the primary reasons was the high interest rates. Rivian’s products are beyond the reach of an average income household.

Also Read: Prime Hydration Faces Lawsuits Claiming Its Sports Drink, Prime Energy, Contains PFAS and Excessive Caffeine

Advertisement

The Rivian’s Electric vehicles target customers were wealthier clients and the spurt in order cancellations means this class is walking away from Rivian’s product.

The stocks of the company were popular for the investors but the reduced demands caused by higher borrowing cost have hit its stock prices badly.

The price war has also affected the EV sector and the company also with its competitors like Tesla has been uniformly affected.

Advertisement

The EV sector marked value has tanked by more than 57% year-to-date.

The chance of a fall in interest rates is not expected since the Federal Reserve will not lower the benchmark interest rate since it could lead to a bout of hyperinflation.

Also another factor which will discourage the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates is the soaring energy prices caused by the war in Ukraine and the Middle East.

Advertisement

Also Read: Lawsuit Claims Kennywood Concealed Steel Curtain Closure to Boost Sales

Continue Reading

World

Lawsuit Claims Kennywood Concealed Steel Curtain Closure to Boost Sales

Published

on

Lawsuit Claims Kennywood Concealed Steel Curtain Closure to Boost Sales

Kennywood’s Steel Curtain roller coaster will not be available this 2024 season, and this has miffed a Kensington man to the extent that he has filed a lawsuit against Kennywood and its parent companies, alleging that the officials had known this fact long before but withheld it to boost season pass sales.

Lawsuit Against Kennywood

The lawsuit, filed in the Allegheny County Common Pleas Court by Joshua Miller and his attorney, John A. Biedrzycki III on Monday, alleges that it was a deliberate attempt to hide the fact to accrue financial benefits by boosting season pass sales.

The lawsuit alleges that Kennywood has created advertising campaigns targeting consumers like Mr. Miller and others to purchase the 2024 season pass under the belief that the benefits included myriad park attractions, including the Steel Curtain.

Advertisement

In the lawsuit, it was revealed that Mr. Miller bought his season pass under the assumption that all rides would be operational.

However, on April 17, three days before the park opened for the season, it was revealed that Steel Curtain would be closed for the season.

The announcement was made by Ricky Spicuzza, the park’s assistant general manager, and the reason for the closure was cited as the coaster undergoing an “extensive modification project.”

Advertisement

Ricky Spicuzza said,

“We understand the frustration many of you have felt not being able to experience the Steel Curtain. On behalf of our entire team, we absolutely share that frustration with you.”

However, the lawsuit contends that the fact was known long before last week that the 220-foot-tall coaster would be out of commission.

The lawsuit states,

Advertisement

“The company withheld this information from season pass purchasers so as not to lose season pass customers, or, alternatively, so as not to offer a discount on season passes due to the unavailability of the Steel Curtain.”

The lawsuit also details numerous violations of the state’s unfair trade practices and consumer protection law. This includes failure to disclose the Steel Curtain’s closure with the full knowledge that the consumer believed that it would be functional for the 2024 season.

The park offered varied passes, which ranged from season passes priced from $109.99 to $239.99.

The lowest endowed pass was the bronze pass, which provided unfettered admission except on certain blackout dates.

Advertisement

The premium range included the platinum pass, which offered year-round admission to Kennywood, Sandcastle, Idlewild, and Palace Entertainment’s Dutch Wonderland in Lancaster.

Additionally, it also offered free parking, discounts on food and retail, and three free guest tickets.

Also Read: Prime Hydration Faces Lawsuits Claiming Its Sports Drink, Prime Energy, Contains PFAS and Excessive Caffeine

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Prime Hydration Faces Lawsuits Claiming Its Sports Drink, Prime Energy, Contains PFAS and Excessive Caffeine

Published

on

Prime Hydration

Prime Energy, the sports drink from Prime Hydration, has been hit by a number of lawsuits for containing excessive amounts of caffeine and PFAS. Another lawsuit was filed on April 8 in the Southern District of New York, accusing Prime Hydration, the parent company which manufactures the sports drink, of engaging in misleading and deceptive practices.

Prime Hydration was founded by two Logan Paul and KSI in 2022, and the products became very popular thanks to the huge followings of the YouTubers. However, the company is now facing a slew of lawsuits over the ingredients in their energy and sports drinks.

New Lawsuit Against Prime Hydration

The latest lawsuit, filed on April 8, accuses the company’s 12-ounce energy drinks of containing 215-225 milligrams of caffeine, exceeding the permissible limit of 200 milligrams. The lawsuit was filed by Lara Vera, a resident of Poughkeepsie, New York.

Advertisement

The lawsuit details that the plaintiff had purchased Prime’s Blue Raspberry products on numerous occasions in August 2022 for about $3 to $4 each, unaware that the products contained caffeine beyond the permissible limits. The plaintiff is seeking damages of $5 million from the company. Lara Vera’s lawsuit alleges that Prime advertised 200 milligrams of caffeine, which is equal to six Coke cans or two 12-ounce Red Bulls. One Red Bull can could contain 114 milligrams of caffeine.

Also Read: Johnson Controls subsidiary Tyco Fire Products to pay $750 mn to settle ‘forever chemicals’ lawsuit

The suit also alleges that there are no safe limits of caffeine for children and that caffeine has been indicted for causing tachycardia, headaches, convulsions, tremors, upset digestion, and adversely affecting mental health.

Advertisement

Earlier, Senator Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., had asked the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to investigate Prime energy drinks in 2023 after reports that the products contained high levels of caffeine. The Senator also accused the company of using vague marketing tactics focused on young people, influencing parents to buy the caffeine-laced drinks for their kids. The lawsuit by Vera also quotes the Senator’s call to the FDA.

Prime is also facing another lawsuit filed on Aug. 2, 2023, in the Northern District of California by the Milberg law firm on behalf of Elizabeth Castillo and others. The lawsuit charges Prime’s products with using flavors containing PFAS, or “forever chemicals.” Forever chemicals are a class of chemicals that are not degraded in the human body or nature and have been indicted as a carcinogenic substance. Independent third-party testing has confirmed that Prime Hydration grape flavor contained PFAS.

Also Read: California mother files lawsuit against Tesla after her 2-year-old child starts Model X and runs over her

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

This will close in 5 seconds