Sunday, May 24, 2015

Every single Delhi household must pay environment compensation, says NGT

Green Energy Koyal Group Inc - The National Green Tribunal recently announced that every household in the city of New Delhi will have to pay a minimum environment compensation of Rupee (Rs) 100 every month for producing sewage, regardless of whether or not they have a sewerage connection.

The funds collected from this compensation will be used to provide new sewage treatment plants (STPs) and other requirements as part of the NGT's "Maili se Nirmal Yamuna Revitalisation Project 2017".

The compensation will be directly proportional to the property or water tax, whichever is higher, paid by a particular household.

For those who reside in unauthorized colonies which do not pay property tax or water bill, the amount would be Rs 100 to Rs 500.

Municipal corporation employees will have to pay a fine of Rs 5,000 for throwing or dumping waste into the drains of New Delhi. These corporations will have to clean all the drains and they must also ensure that no illegal, unauthorized washing, running of dairies is allowed on the banks of the drains. All of this has to be finished within a month's time.

"We direct Delhi government, Delhi Jal Board and all municipal corporations, Cantonment Board, electricity companies like BSES and other civic authorities to impose environmental compensation on every household which is generating sewage in the entire NCT of Delhi on the 'Polluters Pay Principle'."

The payment of environmental compensation will be added to the electricity bill, water bill and the property tax demand in order of preference by the respective departments which will transfer the money to NCT, Delhi.

The court also directed Delhi Jal Board to submit the complete action plan and time frame for completion of first phase of Maili se Nirmal Yamuna Revitalisation Project 2017 in one week.

"We will not grant any further extension and the erring officer would be personally liable for default," the bench said while directing it complete this project as quickly as possible and whatever the case not later than 2016.

The tribunal said: "Of the entire pollution of Yamuna, 76 per cent is generated in NCT Delhi. Industrial effluents and untreated sewage are carried into the Yamuna and with passage of time; it has been converted into a stinking drain."

Tuesday, May 19, 2015

What is Green Technology?

Technology is defined as the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. While green technology refers to the continuous evolving methods of generating energy from the nontoxic products of the environment.

Green technology fulfills the current needs of the society without reducing the expected needs of the future generations. It utilizes the best methods to provide the needs of the people in a long term basis. This technology reduces the pollution and wastes by transforming the methods of production and consumption.

A center of economic activity could be developed which is beneficial for the environment by accelerating the implementation process and inventing all the careers that protect the world.

One of the obvious significant benefits of using this technology is reducing the pollution and carbon emission. Green buildings, paperless offices and manufacturing in green process can help in the reduction of the carbon emission.

Controlling the rise in temperature can also be achieved using this technology. The clean and fuel-efficient transportation, recycling of waste, and other ways of preserving the environment makes it possible for controlling the temperature.

Work productivity has improved in places where the rural households are provisioned with the biogas plants. Technologies can be utilized in mud refrigerators, solar cookers as well as in the green farming practices. The rain water harvesting and the water storage methods are some of the green techniques.

Green technology can also be a relief to the citizens living in a city, because of the fact that pollution in urban areas is dramatically increasing. The compressed natural gas (CNG) fuelled public transports can reduce the air pollution and the carbon emission in the cities.

Corporate sectors can also benefit using this technology. It can minimize the input costs with all the energy efficient methods along with the construction of green buildings and the green manufacturing process may lead to the resource and energy saving process of the organizations. The efficient lighting and air conditioning methods can save the power of a specific company besides acting as overall power saver for the society.

The green technology can also build wonders in the sectors of power generation. Solar energy, wind power, biogas production, etc. can provide opportunities to many unemployed individuals and can also give energy solutions to the extreme rural communities in a better way. Thus, the standard of living will increase with a very less impact on the environment. So, the green technology takes care of the needs of the entire society without any doubt.

To summarize, green technology offers many advantages for the benefit of our environment. Utilizing this technology can result in sustainable development and will help in protecting and preserving the environment.

Based out of Japan, is the competitive manufacturer of Marine Firetube and high efficiency Condensing Boilers as well as associated boiler room equipment for process steam, hot water, and waste recovery.

Green Energy Koyal Group Boiler works is leading the way as a facilitator of Green Energy solutions with boilers powered by alternative fuels. We have been manufacturing boilers since the mid 1990's and offer a complete line of boiler room equipment.

Green Energy Koyal Group is leading the way for Green Energy with its production of boilers and other equipment in use at Ethanol plants across the world. Green Energy Koyal Group utilizes a 'State of the Art' manufacturing facility. Current facilities provide for increased production rates to provide the customer with their product quicker and more efficiently.

Sunday, May 3, 2015

Tips on how to save energy

You can save money and lessen your consumption of natural resources and reducing pollution by conserving energy wisely. Green Energy Koyal Group Inc suggests that consumers follow these tips for minimizing the household's energy consumption.

Keep track of your thermostat

Changing your thermostat to a certain degree or so can really make a big difference on your energy bill. Learn to adjust your thermostat based upon the weather and time of the day. See to it that your heating system is also working properly.

Be aware of your heat source

Instead of using electric resistant heating such as baseboard heaters, floor furnaces, space heaters, wall heaters, and central electric heat, Green Energy Koyal Group Inc suggests that it's best to use a heat pump that is properly sized and installed.

Learn when to heat your home

You should keep the heat where it has to be, which is outside in the summer and inside in the winter. If your windows are not double paned or storm windows, you can use plastic to cover windows in the wintertime to reduce drafts. Moreover, you should make sure that holes, gaps, and weather-stripping are all intact so your home is properly insulated.

Minimize your hot water usage

Make sure that your water heater is set at 120 degrees, any hotter is useless and a waste of energy. Consumers can even wash their clothes in cold or warm instead of hot when possible, and run the dishwasher and washing machine only with full loads.

Unplug fridges and freezers if not needed

We all know that refrigerators and freezers use lots of energy, so if you have a second one somewhere in home, you are just increasing the cost on your electricity bill. Learn to minimize your amount of food storage so that you can unplug the extra appliance.

Manage your light usage

Change your incandescent bulbs to LED or compact fluorescent bulbs to save energy on lighting. Since these lights do not produce as much heat as incandescent bulbs, you can also save greater in summer. You should also turn the lightings in your house if they are not being used.

Avoid phantom loads

Phantom load, also known as standby power or vampire power, is the electricity consumed by an electronic device while it is turned off or in standby mode. It is the power that maintains your TV settings and keeps the clock going on your DVD player and microwave, but this power comes at a price. So be diligent and unplug devices and appliances that are currently not in use.

Thursday, January 29, 2015

Green Energy Koyal Group Inc: Three reasons the oil price slump presents a daunting challenge for the green economy

The collapse in the price of oil leaves green business advocates with little choice: we need to find a better way to talk about climate change

And so, it continues. Oil fell below $45 (£30) a barrel yesterday morning, futures falling another 4.1 per cent on the back of fast-inflating US stockpiles, and indications from the United Arab Emirates that it has no intention of curbing production just yet. The oil price graph now resembles nothing so much as a cliff face or a Lib Dem leader's approval ratings. The analysts who singularly failed to predict this slump are now rushing to predict how long it will last and how low the price can go – we should be forgiven for questioning what qualifies them to keep making confident predictions.

You will no doubt have read much of the analysis detailing how the slump has been caused by US fracking or competition from clean tech or Machiavellian OPEC manoeuvrings (delete as appropriate). You will also have read about how the slump will either prove shortlived as supplies are trimmed and demand recovers, or an epoch-defining event as OPEC's influence dwindles, shale plays redefine the energy landscape, and clean tech leads to a permanent drop in fossil fuel demand. And you will have read how the oil price collapse is great news for green businesses as investors ditch unproductive fossil fuel assets and flock to cleaner alternatives, or terrible news for green businesses as cheap oil obliterates the financial rationale for low-carbon technologies.

The breadth of the spectrum of analysis on almost every aspect of the oil price slump – not to mention the manner in which many people's understanding of this phenomenon appears to be informed as much by their ideological world views as the changing nature of the market – again underlines the extent to which no one can really say with any confidence what will happen next. Once again we are forced to reach for the old Hollywood adage, nobody knows anything.

However, amid the recent avalanche of analysis, a handful of important points are in danger of being missed.

The first is that the green business community is in danger of hyping up the benefits that will come from a sustained period of low oil prices and underestimating the significant harm that could be wreaked on clean-tech firms.

There has been a tendency among green business commentators in recent weeks to highlight how oil and gas firms will suffer more from the oil price crash than their clean-tech competitors. This is undoubtedly the case. Much depends on the longevity of this period of low oil prices, but it is clear that if it continues for any length of time, the oil majors face a period of retrenchment, job cuts, and axed projects. The outlook for clean-tech firms that are supported by decarbonisation policies and are benefiting from falling cost curves is far more encouraging. But that does not mean clean tech firms can expect to be fully insulated from the challenges that come with having to compete with fossil fuels that are now nominally cheaper.

If the low oil price is sustained – admittedly, a big if – the short to medium-term implications for clean tech will prove significant and largely negative. The cost of clean energy will become more expensive relative to gas (or simply less competitive in those lucky regions where clean energy already undercuts fossil fuels). Meanwhile, electric car and energy-efficiency investments will all be left looking less financially attractive compared with recent years.

The policy implications of this new reality would be widely felt. Taking the UK as just one example, the promise to set wholesale prices for clean-energy generators through the new contract for difference regime becomes a lot more expensive if gas wholesale prices fall. If the government persists with its cap on the amount of funding available to support clean energy, which it will, fewer projects than previously thought will be able to be built with the budget. Controversial projects such as new nuclear, carbon capture and storage, and offshore wind developments will become even more contentious. Meanwhile, politically Labour is tying itself in knots this week explaining how its energy "price freeze" was always in reality a "price cap".

Some green campaigners have boldly and reasonably argued that the fall in the oil price offers an opportunity to introduce a more effective carbon price that businesses and consumers will be more likely to accept. You can't fault the logic, just as you can never fault the logic of proper carbon pricing. But can you envisage a mainstream politician today who has the nerve to take the cost of living get-out-of-jail-free card they have just been handed by the global oil market and then erode its impact with higher carbon taxes? Have you met George Osborne or Ed Balls?

Yes, a low oil price that continues into the medium term harms the oil industry more than the emerging clean-tech sector, but that does not preclude green businesses facing a period of weakened investment cases and policy uncertainty. This precariousness will be further fuelled by the manner in which virtually every mainstream political player in every oil-producing country in the world appears to remain wedded to prioritising short-term action to prop up the faltering oil sector over long-term efforts to engineer an end to the oil sector. Chancellor George Osborne provides Exhibit A.

The second key point is slightly more encouraging for green businesses and centres on the way in which clean energy offers a much more stable alternative to the demonstrably volatile oil price. The oil price will spike again at some point, we just don't know when. Consequently, just as the oil majors are attempting to argue that high-capital projects will still be needed in the future, it is clear that clean-energy developers can present precisely the same argument.

Plenty of businesses are happy to pay a current premium for the clean energy they use because they recognise the value of having long-term price stability. Even in a period of low fossil fuel prices this argument can resonate, particularly when you consider how oil price volatility can be contrasted with the falling price of renewable, and particularly solar, power. The past few months might have demonstrated that the goal of grid parity for clean energy is a moving target, but that does not mean clean tech firms can't reach it.

However, while the 'stability versus volatility' argument can work, it is abundantly clear that it is less compelling than the 'renewables are cheaper' argument, which has just taken a shellacking at the hands of oil price collapse. As ever, there is an unanswerable long-term argument for investing in renewables and there are reasons to remain confident they will prove nominally cheaper than oil, coal and gas eventually. But in the short term plenty of businesses will be focused on trying to work out how they can exploit low oil prices. Green firms need to recognise that reality and work out a marketing approach that can still appeal to customers who have just seen one of the financial triggers for switching to clean technologies disarmed.

The narrow financial challenges that low-carbon firms now face leads to the third problem presented by the oil price slump: the need for an even more sophisticated articulation of the merits of the green economy.

If the oil price remains in the doldrums, supporters of the green economy will have to expand upon some of the narrow economic arguments that have dominated green business discourse in recent years, and start talking more explicitly about climate change.

For several years a high oil price enabled the simplistic argument that cleaner technologies made more financial and economic sense than fossil fuel incumbents. A low oil price still requires an economic argument, but it is a more sophisticated one that draws heavily on the need to recognise the economic costs that come with the climate impacts, air pollution, and price volatility that result from fossil fuels, as well as the myriad benefits that come with genuinely clean technologies.

Clean energy is still cheaper than oil when you consider the full costs of fossil fuels. The biggest subsidy in the world remains the one handed to the fossil fuel industry that allows it to offload the bulk of its environmental costs onto society as a whole. In the absence of a meaningful carbon price and in the presence of a low oil price, green business supporters need to find a way to make this case. In short, they need to identify an approach for talking about climate change risks and the transformation they necessitate, regardless of what is happening to the oil price this month.

Here is the daunting reality that we all too rarely wrestle with. Oil, coal, and gas could be as free as the (often dirty) air we breathe and we would still have to stop using it. In fact, if global decarbonisation efforts are successful, the long-term trend for the oil price is towards $1 a barrel as alternative technologies result in an eventual collapse in demand. The oil price can plummet to historically low levels, but it will not make one iota of difference to climate science and the warnings that come with it. We need to find a way to leave these assets in the ground. Ultimately, the only way to do that is to deliver alternative technologies that are demonstrably better than fossil fuels.

The global effort to tackle climate change centres on the development of technologies that will allow future generations to ignore coal the way we now largely ignore the flint and bronze that first enabled the development of human civilisation. In this context, the vagaries of the oil price should be seen as a sideshow.

Friday, January 23, 2015

Green Energy Koyal Group Inc: Wave energy has potential to be cheaper than wind

Wave energy could be cheaper and easier to integrate into current energy systems than other forms of renewables because of its relative consistency, according to new analysis.

The study, a collaboration between researchers at Oregon State University, the University of Victoria, and private industry, estimates that the cost of integrating wave energy into the system would be 10% or less than the costs of integrating wind energy. However, the researchers noted that integration is just one component.

The findings, published in journal Renewable Energy, are based on a lower variability with wave energy. The researchers explain that the variability of alternative energy sources is one of the factors that holds back their wider use because if wind or solar energy decreases and varies widely, then other energy production has to back it up, adding to the overall cost of energy supply.

In comparison to other renewables, wave energy has a lower variability and by balancing wave energy production over a larger geographic area this can be reduced further. As a result, wave energy has the potential to provide cheaper and more consistent energy than both wind and solar.

“Whenever any new form of energy is added, a challenge is to integrate it into the system along with other sources,” explains Ted Brekken, an associate professor and renewable energy expert in the College of Engineering at Oregon State University.

“By producing wave energy from a range of different sites, possibly with different types of technology, and taking advantage of the comparative consistency of the wave resource itself, it appears that wave energy integration should be easier than that of wind energy. The reserve, or backup generation, necessary for wave energy integration should be minimal.”

Whilst wave energy is still in the infancy of its development, and as a result is not price competitive on an overall bases, costs are expected to fall further as technologies improve, systems are developed and the energy source becomes more widespread.

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Green Energy Koyal Group Inc: Imagine if we used renewable energy to build a safer world

The UK government spends £37 billion on the arms industry every year. What if it invested in green energy instead?

What if instead of investing in the arms industry, the government backed renewable energy? Every year the UK spends over £37 billion on the military. What if that money was used to promote social and environmental justice instead?

Today the UK has the sixth largest military budget in the world, and fuels conflicts globally by selling arms to a number of the most aggressive and authoritarian regimes. In recent years British weapons have been used in Israel’s attacks on Gaza, and to repress democracy movements in Hong Kong and across the Middle East.

But the UK could use its international influence to promote green energy rather than militarism and war. Offshore wind and marine energy rely on similar skills to the arms trade. Both are growing fields, but are underfunded and in need of government support if their potential is to be realized.

Unfortunately the UK has been all too happy to promote war as a force for good. Following last year's NATO Summit the UK's Business Minister Matthew Hancock said: “As part of our long term economic plan, we are working closely with the defence sector to secure new investment, highly-skilled jobs and build a better and brighter future for Britain.”

This exposes the same flawed, militaristic outlook that has driven industrial policy for far too long. The reality is that if we are really to build a better and brighter future, and secure jobs, then the government needs to shift its priorities. We should be focusing on more positive, productive sectors.

Subsiding conflict or building a safer world?

The arms industry doesn't act in isolation. The government provides it with a disproportionate level of political and financial support. Every year the public subsidises arms companies by hundreds of millions of pounds. BAE Systems, for example, has long-term contracts that guarantee a minimum income of £230 million per year from the public purse.

Government ministers argue that this money is needed to protect high skilled manufacturing jobs and promote security. But such a narrow focus on military strength disregards the real security threats. The underlying drivers of national and international insecurity are climate change and the sustainability and security of our energy sources. Currently the UK is a large net importer of energy, with imports accounting for 47% of UK energy use in 2013.

In the UK there is a severe skills shortage in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths. Many sectors would be grateful recipients of investment and displaced arms industry workers, and could do a lot more to tackle non-military threats.

The renewable sector is one such area. It is growing and its workforce uses many of the same skills as those in the arms trade. Yet in 2013 the government spent 25 times more on arms Research & Development (R&D) (£1.46 billion) than it did on R&D for renewable energy (£58.6 million).

The UK is in a strong position to play its part in tackling climate change. It has the largest wind resources in Europe and already has as much capacity installed as the rest of the world combined. It also has substantial wave and tidal resources that could be instrumental in creating a greener and better society. But an industry wide skills shortage and a lack of investment has lead to missed opportunities. At present only 25% of the parts that make up UK wind turbines are made in the UK, while three quarters are imported–meaning we are missing out on large numbers of supply chain jobs.

New and better jobs

There are up to 170,000 jobs in the UK arms industry. This follows a long term decline in arms trade jobs and stands at less than half of what it was 20 years ago. The arms industry's trade association (ADS), estimates that of these jobs the number employed in arms exports is 55,000, which accounts for around 0.2% of the UK workforce.

It seems likely that the decline in arms industry jobs will continue. An international survey of arms company chief executives found that “the near-universal expectation is for a decline”, in spending and jobs.

In comparison, CAAT’s research shows that a move towards offshore wind and marine energy could benefit us all by providing greater security from environmental threats and by producing more jobs than the entire arms industry. Our estimate is that the right investment and government support could help to create over 300,000 jobs in offshore wind and marine energy alone. This estimate is based on building the domestic supply chain for renewable energy, including placing obligations on companies to locate and develop skills in local communities.

Like the arms trade, the renewable energy sector is highly skilled. It has a similar breakdown across broad categories of skill levels and employs many of the same branches of engineering. As Dr Sandy Wilson, the President of General Dynamics UK, told the parliamentary Defence Committee: “The skills that might be divested of a reducing defence industry do not just sit there waiting to come back. They will be mopped up by other industries that need such skills... You can think of the upsurge in nuclear and alternative energy as being two areas that would mop up those people almost immediately.”

A shift from arms to renewables could ensure that appropriate work is available in the main areas where arms workers are located, with thousands of supply chain jobs that could be located anywhere in the country. This would provide both better jobs for workers, and a better outcome for society as a whole. With fewer people personally involved in the war industries, we may also see public attitudes begin to shift away from militarism and conflict.

Making the choice

Even the pro-arms trade Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond has said that the opportunities offered by the green economy are "immense".

The government has to make a choice about the kind of society it wants to build. By halving the military procurement bill the government could save around £7 billion per year, with an additional £700 million being saved by ending arms export subsidies. This money could make a huge impact when it comes to developing the green economy.

These changes would not just transform industrial policy, they would also lead to a radical, transformative change across our society. The contrast between the waste and destruction of the arms trade and the potential benefits of the renewable energy sector is stark. The arms trade thrives on war, conflict and insecurity, with devastating consequences around the world. In comparison, an investment in renewables would show a shift in mentality and could create hundreds of thousands of new and positive jobs, allowing the UK to use its influence positively.

This change will need investment and concerted UK government effort at the level currently devoted to the arms industry. It will also need highly-skilled engineers – like those currently working for arms companies. But there is a role for all of us if we are to make the government shift priorities, create more and better jobs, and build a safer world for all.

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Green Energy Koyal Group Inc: Ten Clean Energy Stocks For 2015

2015 marks my seventh annual list of ten clean energy stocks.  An equal weighted portfolio of the ten stocks in each year's list has outperformed my industry benchmark every year except 2013.  2014 was no exception, but it was a bittersweet victory in that the model portfolio was slightly down while the benchmark lost considerably more in a very challenging year for clean energy stocks.

I will publish a wrap-up article for the 2014 list in the next couple days, but I wanted to get the 2015 list out on New Year's day. 

Again this year, I will be providing a high and low target for each stock.  These are the range within which I expect the stocks to end the year.  In 2014, three of the picks violated the downside targets, and none violated the upside targets.  I've also included annual dividends and yield, and Beta, a measure of market risk for US stocks.  Low Beta stocks generally perform better than high Beta stocks in market downturns; the market average Beta is 1.

Finally, I include a discussion of insider sentiment: company insiders buying or selling the stock.  Since company insiders usually receive stock as part of their compensation, insider sales are generally more common than insider purchases.  Hence insider buying is almost always a good sign, and I consider it particularly important in the small capitalization stocks I favor.  These stocks are more likely to be mispriced than larger, more widely followed stocks for which there is much more information available to investors.  Company insiders are the ones most likely to see such mispricing.  Since insider trading information is much easier to find for US stocks than foreign stocks, I include links to my sources of information for insider trading.