Tag: 上海夜网GS

S&P analysis sees more early retirements coming for U.S. coal-fired power plants

first_img FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享S&P Global Market Intelligence ($):Several power markets have reported a drop in electricity demand of 10% or more due to the stay-at-home orders of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated economic recession. Furthermore, first quarter 2020 reports show coal usage and employment decreased significantly, and impacts are continuing into the second quarter. S&P Global Market Intelligence ran a scenario of its Power Forecast with a constant 10% decrease in demand across all power markets except the Electric Reliability Council of Texas Inc., using the first-quarter forecast as the baseline for comparison. Results indicate significant decreases in coal-fired generation nationwide if demand reductions persist. Coal-fired generation in Midcontinent ISO and PJM Interconnection could use 30 million fewer tons of coal, while the Powder River Basin coal-producing region may deliver 34.8 million fewer tons due to the demand reduction.In 2020, when cheap natural gas and the 10% reduction in electricity demand act in concert to put pressure on coal, predictions show 154 TWh less coal production, equal to 23% of U.S. baseline coal generation, resulting in 83 million fewer tons of coal burned and 173 million fewer tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere. In 2021, after gas prices have rebounded, only the decreased demand remains, highlighting those impacts independently. Nationwide, 71 million tons of coal are at risk due to COVID-related demand decreases, equivalent to a 17% loss in production.In the case where demand remains 10% reduced and gas prices return, the power markets of MISO and PJM, both with historically large amounts of coal consumption, make up nearly half of the coal at risk. MISO could experience a 15.9 million ton loss from a drop in 28.5 TWh of generation from coal, equal to 15% of baseline coal usage. PJM could see a loss of 13.5 million tons, which reflects 31.3 TWh less generation, or 17% of baseline usage. The Southwest Power Pool is predicted to experience the largest cut in coal production, at 18%, or 9.7 million tons burned and 16.3 TWh of generation. In the Western Electricity Coordinating Council, Market Intelligence estimates a loss of 14%, equal to 7.9 million tons of coal, due to decreased electricity demand.From the perspective of coal production, the risk of demand reduction is not shared equally. With PJM in the East and MISO in the Midwest receiving much of the at-risk coal production, Powder River Basin coal for long-haul rail delivery is the first to be dropped. Western coal basins take the brunt of the risk, with more than 39 million tons in potential lost production.Powder River Basin and Northern Appalachia mines saw a sharp decrease in production in the first quarter of 2020, while Central Appalachia saw a slight increase. With a continued reduction in electricity demand and a return of gas prices, Appalachian coal is projected to greatly decrease, down 8.4% from 2018 production. Powder River Basin coal is expected to take the largest hit to volumes, with nearly 35 million tons at risk, or 10.5% of 2018 production.There are 15,628 MW of coal plants with scheduled retirement dates between 2021 and 2040 in the East, and 6,480 MW in the West. With decreased demand putting pressure on these units, there is an increased probability of early retirements, resulting in more strain on the mines from which they receive their fuel. In particular, Market Intelligence estimates that the North Antelope Rochelle and Black Thunder mines in the Powder River Basin are most at risk, attributed to the number of plants with planned retirements that may be accelerated due to reductions in demand. The Tunnel Ridge and Marshall County mines are the most at risk in Northern Appalachia from the same factors.[Katherine McCaffrey and Alexander Cook]More ($): COVID-19 electricity demand reductions could cut coal consumption 20% RRA S&P analysis sees more early retirements coming for U.S. coal-fired power plantslast_img read more

Read More
The inexplicable resurrection of Manny Pacquiao’s boxing career

first_imgFor the first time in a long time, boxing fans from all over believe in Pacquiao again. He’s no longer being viewed as a politician who moonlights as a boxer in his spare time. All signs point toward Pacquiao being fully committed to the sport that granted him access to riches and a career outside of boxing. Now it’s time for him to pay it back.    “Beating an undefeated champion at 40 years old means that I can still fight,” he said. “This is an opportunity to add to my legacy.“I’m not finished yet.” LAS VEGAS — Almost a year ago to the day, this writer penned a column titled “Manny Pacquiao is fighting again and nobody cares.” It was published the day before Pacquiao was set to fight Lucas Matthysse in Malaysia on the relatively new ESPN+ streaming platform. He was a year removed from losing a controversial decision to a fighter he would have run laps around in his heyday when he lost to Jeff Horn in Australia. The prevailing thought was that boxing’s only eight-division champion was preparing to take a farewell tour around the globe and beat up on lesser opponents with his diminishing skill set. After all, he had looked like a shell of his former self and the man that ransacked multiple divisions needed to focus on his senatorial duties while leveraging high-reward, low-risk fights to pad his bank account on the way out.  Watch Manny Pacquiao vs. Keith Thurman on FITE.TVThe idea that a 40-year-old Pacquiao would be facing the undefeated 30-year-old Keith “One Time” Thurman would have been a joke a year or two ago. But the roles have reversed. One year since that column ran, the one who was supposed to be washed up has been reborn; while the hungry young lion has seemingly become full while nursing an injury on the sidelines. It’s the perfect time for these trains collide as Pacquiao will challenge Thurman for the WBA (Super) welterweight title on July 20 in a fascinating showdown where we will find out how much of their respective narratives is true, and how much happens to be smoke and mirrors.   It all started when Pacquiao scored his first knockout in just shy of a decade by flattening Matthysse in the seventh round. It was a far cry from the Filipino fighter who was uninterested in inflicting damage upon his opponents as he took his foot off the gas in fights against the likes of Timothy Bradley, Jessie Vargas, Chris Algieri and Brandon Rios. Something changed. Freddie Roach told Sporting News that his dwindling return on pay-per-view sales was a catalyst for Pacquiao finding his killer instinct. But he also pointed at two fights that began shifting his mindset. “I’m happy that he lost to Floyd Mayweather and Jeff Horn,” Roach revealed about his star pupil. “Those performances were disappointing, but they made a difference in him. He wants to be better.” After blitzing Matthysse, Pacquiao was paired with the brash Adrien Broner for a January showdown. It didn’t take long for Pacquiao to impose his will on “The Problem” and spark an idea that maybe the old Manny Pacquiao was truly back. A huge left hand in the 9th round sent Broner into the ropes. Unlike his previous fights, Pacquiao stormed in for the kill and hurt Broner badly before the sound of the bell rescued him from unconsciousness. Was Pacquiao really back or did he look good against fading opponents? We’ll get to find out when he faces Thurman at the MGM Grand Garden Arena. “I could say this fight is the most important fight in my career,” Pacquaio said earlier in the week. “At the age of 40 I have to prove something and my opponent is very good at talking.”The latter part is interesting. Although he’s been all smiles, a particular line from Thurman’s bag of barbs has clearly rubbed Pacquaio the wrong way. “I know he likes to quote Bible verses so I’ll let you know – he’s getting crucified,” Thurman said at a press conference in Beverly Hills when the fight was announced.  Fast forward to fight week where Pacquiao has gleefully relished the opportunity to be back in the spotlight. It’s his second pay-per-view fight at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in less than a year and the boxer-slash-politician is fielding questions in a room full of select media.Pacquiao has never been one to show a lot of emotion outside of the boxing ring but when that quote is brought back up, he pauses. “I think the thing he said to motivate me more than anything else is that he’s going to crucify me,” Pacquiao said before pausing again as he pondered his next verbal offering. “I want to teach him a lesson.”Although he would reinforce the idea that it was all business, Roach suggested that there is certainly some underlying anger that his pupil plans to unleash in Las Vegas. “Keith has talked it up to make Manny angry and now he’s going to get a more aggressive Manny,” Roach said. “Whenever Manny is upset or dislikes an opponent, he fights much better. And when he’s more aggressive he’s a much better fighter.”While Roach wouldn’t go as far to guarantee a knockout, he does believe that Pacquiao’s aggression could force Thurman into a shell — much like Broner — where the goal is survival. “I do think he’ll go into a shell after he feels Manny’s power,” Roach said. “I’m kind of counting on that because I know his trainer very well and I think he’s going to send his guy out there to show us that he’s the bigger and stronger guy. I would do the same. But the thing is, once he feels Manny’s power and speed and that will change everything, the fight will change.”Pacquiao told Sporting News that he hopes that Thurman comes to fight, but wouldn’t be surprised if he turtles up either. “I want to make a good fight for the fans with good action,” Pacquiao said. “I think I can handle him because he’s not fast like Broner. But if I hurt him, I don’t know what his reaction will be. We’ll see.”Join DAZN and watch more than 100 fight nights a yearThe fact remains in that there hasn’t been this much excitement surrounding a Manny Pacquiao fight since he faced Floyd Mayweather just over four years ago. Few, if any, fighters find a second wind in their boxing career as they enter 40. Most fighters are chewed up and spat out by the sport when the exit their prime years. But Pacquiao isn’t like most fighters. According to Roach, the issue with Pacquiao was never physical ability.; it was all mental. And it’s a hurdle that he’s seemingly overcome in the past 12 months. “He hasn’t lost his killer punch but because of his religion he didn’t want to hurt anybody,” Roach explains. “I told him that if he doesn’t want to hurt anybody these decisions will keep happening to him. When you knock them out there are no questions asked.”last_img read more

Read More

first_imgMore than 170 runners turned up at the Finn Valley Centre today for the Our Lady’s Hospital 5k 2014.The Finn Valley trackThe race was won by Finn Valley athlete Shane McNulty in a time of 18.00 pipping his fellow club athlete Shane Gallagher by just one second at the finish line.Here is a list of all the runners who took part in what was a very worthy cause. Well done to all who took part.Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club1 201 18.00 Shane McNulty M35 Finn Valley A C2 263 18.01 Gallagher Shane SM Finn Valley A C 3 226 18.05 Bannon Ciaran SM LAC4 229 19.51 Gallen Eugene SM AgyarranRunners5 264 20.05 Gallagher Barry SM Finn Valley A C6 341 20.45 Kelly Gary SM KCR 7 211 21.02 McGill Eoin SM KCR8 227 21.22 Mackey Sarina W40 24/7 Triathlon9 274 21.25 O’Donnell Maurice SM Individual10 231 21.33 Hegarty Martina SM Finn Valley A C 11 204 21.33 Catterson Alan M40 Finn Valley A C12 207 21.54 Bonner Noreen W55 Finn Valley A C13 259 22.00 Kenny Sinead SW Finn Valley A C14 210 22.05 Leighton Andrew M40 Individual15 214 22.13 McMenamin Peter SM Individual16 262 22.22 Bonner Miriam W40 Finn Valley A C17 336 22.24 McGlynn Shaun SM Individual18 232 22.47 Gallen Joe M55 Lifford A C19 285 22.48 McBrearty Amanda SW CastlefinnRunners20 202 22.52 Byrne Pat M50 Killybegs A C21 258 22.53 McGuire James SM Individual22 300 22.55 Maguire Carol W40 Finn Valley A C23 205 22.56 Anderson Martin M45 Finn Valley A C24 293 23.03 Patterson Lisa SW KCR25 253 23.40 McGahern Denise SW Finn Valley A C26 339 23.47 Connolly Seamus SM Individual27 235 23.48 McBrde Carmel SW KCR28 290 23.48 Conlin Kiera Master Finn Valley A C29 296 23.52 Campbell Joanne SW Finn Valley A C30 255 23.57 McColgan Marie SW Finn Valley A C31 273 24.04 McNulty Tony SM Individual32 218 24.13 Kelly Eamon SM KCR33 328 24.35 O’Donnell Sean SM Lifford A C34 301 24.51 Goudie Wendie SW Individual35 221 24.58 Mc Bride Danny SM Individual36 254 25.07 Doherty Lisa SW Individual37 215 25.21 McMenamin Josh JM Individual38 251 25.30 Carroll Clara SW Finn Valley A C39 208 25.47 Connolly Giselda FVI Finn Valley A C40 269 26.01 McLaughlin Aine SW Individual41 236 26.06 McGrath Amanda SW Individual42 275 26.07 Rushe Stephanie SW Finn Valley A C43 212 26.12 Nash Jim M45 Finn Valley A C44 237 26.18 O’Donnell Grace SW Convoy45 353 26.27 Gallinagh Noelle SW Individual46 321 26.28 Finn Paul SM Finn Valley A C47 206 26.28 Bogle Enda SM Individual48 314 26.29 O’Leary Joey M45 CastlefinnRunners49 228 26.40 Kilpatrick Veronica W40 Convoy50 239 26.46 Harvey Cora SW Finn Valley A C51 270 27.00 Callaghan Louise SW Individual52 331 27.07 Pearson Jennifer SW Individual53 294 27.11 Duffy Lisa SW Individual54 320 27.14 Gallen Elin JW Finn Valley A C55 297 27.19 Scanlon Wendy Walker Individual56 360 27.23 McMenamin Bernie SW AgyarranRunners57 303 27.43 O’Hagen Breeda Walker Individual58 213 27.47 Kee Nicola W40 KCR59 276 27.50 O’Hara Brenda SW Individual60 359 27.54 Doherty Margaret SW Individual61 217 28.00 Neeson Kieran SM KCR62 266 28.03 McBrearty Maureen SW Individual63 323 28.13 McGuire Nicky SM Individual64 209 28.24 Chambers Donna SW KCR65 261 28.28 Gallen Eirinn JW Finn Valley A C66 265 28.29 Gallagher Mary SW KCR67 278 28.38 McGlinchey Roisin SW Individual68 224 28.39 McGinty Sharon SW Finn Valley A C69 225 28.41 Dinnion Roisin SW Finn Valley A C70 317 29.04 Gallagher Marie SW Finn Valley A C71 216 29.21 Neeson Sharon SW Finn Valley A C72 332 29.25 Pearson Hillary SW Individual73 327 29.32 Mailey John SM Convoy74 252 29.43 Gordon Aishlin SW Individual75 257 29.54 Given Gary JM Individual76 256 29.54 Given Thomas SM Individual77 246 30.01 Ronaghan Julie SW Convoy78 267 30.16 McBrearty Mary SW Individual79 230 30.21 Gallen Bridgeen SW Individual80 238 30.28 McHugh Kevin SM AgyarranRunners81 329 30.33 O’Brien Coleen SW KCR82 333 30.47 Lynch Rosaleen SW Individual83 312 30.53 Doran Mattheww Walker Individual84 386 30.58 Patton Laura JW Individual85 385 30.59 Patton Terence M40 Individual86 311 31.03 Doran Mia Walker Individual87 309 31.03 Doran Angela Walker Individual88 250 31.05 Neely Edel SW Finn Valley A C89 203 31.05 Martin Mary w60 Finn Valley A C90 243 31.27 Parkinson Hannah JW Convoy91 242 31.30 Parkinson Rosemary SW Convoy92 349 31.31 Kenny Stephen SM Finn Valley A C93 233 31.36 Whelan Noleen SW KCR94 260 31.38 Gallen Betty SW Finn Valley A C95 334 32.44 Lynch Gary SM Individual96 335 32.56 Wallace Eithne SW Individual97 222 33.46 McBride Emily JW Individual98 298 34.15 Scanlon Daithi Walker Individual99 287 34.34 Gallen Mairead SW Individual100 268 35.19 McGroarty Pauric SM Individual101 299 35.19 Scanlon Ruairi Walker Individual102 304 35.45 O’Hagen Caitlin Walker Individual103 277 36.16 O’Hara Joey JM Individual104 340 37.08 Ruddy Ronan SM Finn Valley A C105 352 37.08 Speight James SM Finn Valley A C106 302 37.18 Dohert Oisin Walker Individual107 280 40.00 Harrold B Local Individual108 305 40.33 Doherty Amy Walker Individual109 350 42.04 Bradley Shay JM Individual110 330 42.40 O’Brien Patricia SW KCR111 356 42.40 McIntyre Bernie SW Individual112 272 42.40 Walsh John SM Individual113 271 42.40 Walsh Ann Marie SW Individual114 306 43.05 Brennan Conal Walker Individual115 362 43.05 Bradley James SM Individual116 245 43.21 Melaugh Teresa SW Individual117 361 43.40 Bradley Annette SW Individual118 244 43.40 McGahern Bernie JW Individual119 283 44.58 Kildea Heather SW Individual120 284 44.59 Kildea Joe SM Individual121 219 45.01 Lawerence Emma SW Individual122 367 45.09 Doherty Ethan Walker Individual123 364 45.09 Doherty Barry SM Individual124 234 45.32 McGahern Sandra SW Individual125 223 45.32 McGahern Anne SW Individual126 357 46.01 McIntyre Alan SM Individual127 358 46.05 Deery Vivienne SW Individual128 351 46.05 Deery Shane Walker CastlefinnRunners129 369 46.05 Mongan Cormac Walker Individual130 325 46.26 Wilson Frances SW KCR131 326 46.26 Wilson Marty SM KCR132 342 46.39 McGinty Rylie Walker Individual133 348 46.42 O’Mairtin Cruher SM Individual134 347 46.47 O’Loughlin Marie Walker Individual135 355 46.47 O;Laughlin Brigid SW Individual136 282 47.06 O’Brien Marie SW Individual137 366 47.06 Doherty Mary Walker Individual138 365 47.06 Doherty Fiona SW Individual139 281 47.06 O’Brien Kay SW Individual140 313 47.12 Doran Adam Walker Individual141 310 47.12 Doran Martin Walker Individual142 319 47.17 Kelly Jeneen Walker Individual143 381 47.17 Kelly Tanya Walker Individual144 343 47.17 McGinty Laura Walker Individual145 308 48.20 Wright Damien Walker KCR146 307 48.20 Wright Rith Walker KCR147 318 48.35 Kelly John Walker Individual148 241 48.54 Gallen Annice JW Finn Valley A C149 354 49.42 McGinty Greta SW Individual150 240 49.45 Harvey Niamh JW Finn Valley A C151 368 49.46 Murray Joanne Walker Individual152 324 51.15 Doherty Joanne SW Individual153 220 51.15 McGinty Catriona SW Individual154 383 51.19 Gallagher Michael Walker Individual155 384 51.19 Gallagher Louise Walker Individual156 288 51.25 Browne Ian SM Individual157 247 51.26 Ronaghan Adrian SM Convoy158 322 51.27 Gillespie Leah SW Individual159 292 51.31 Kelly Geraldine Walker Individual160 291 51.31 McKane John Walker Individual161 279 51.32 Harrold Joe M35 Individual162 345 53.30 Duffy PJ Walker Individual163 248 53.41 Gillespie Olive SW Individual164 249 53.41 Gillespie Ken SM Individual165 316 54.01 Murphy Gerri Walker Individual166 344 54.12 Kelly Emma Walker Finn Valley A C167 346 54.12 Kelly Matthew Walker Finn Valley A C168 363 56.07 Boyle Amanda Walker Individual169 315 56.07 Murphy Patricia Walker Individual170 338 57.18 Gallagher Leanne SW Individual171 337 57.18 McConalogue Mary SW IndividualTotal Runners: 171MORE THAN 170 TURN OUT FOR OUR LADY’S HOSPITAL 5K – WHERE DID YOU COME? was last modified: July 13th, 2014 by StephenShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Tags:5kdonegalfinn valleylast_img read more

Read More