Gas alam kekuasaan Texas

US Dept Energi mengutip Texas sebagai memproduksi dan mengkonsumsi lebih banyak listrik daripada negara lain. Texas adalah produsen gas alam terbesar dalam the nation, suppying seperempat dari total output; menyimpan dan menyediakan gas alam melalui pipa untuk seluruh wilayah negara. Namun sementara Texas memiliki cadangan besar batubara rendah kelas, sebagian besar dari apa yang terbakar di batubara tanaman dibawa masuk melalui kereta api dari Wyoming, dan Montana.

Jadi, masuk akal untuk Texas generator listrik lebih mengandalkan pasokan gas alam di kami halaman belakang daripada menunggu berikutnya 10.000 ton batu bara untuk roll di dari Wyoming. Lebih dari setengah dari Texas' energi berasal dari gas alam-powered pembangkit. Ini membakar lebih bersih daripada batu bara dan tidak meninggalkan jumlah besar cinder dan abu yang memerlukan pembuangan yang tepat.

Gas alam dan minyak telah kembar komoditas yang membantu membangun Texas. Gas alam pipa peregangan segala arah dari Texas dan telah lama digunakan di seluruh AS untuk panas, cahaya, dan generasi listrik. Jadi, sangat sedikit heran bahwa di negeri ini harga telah lama menjadi terikat minyak, komoditas di pasar yang sangat stabil di mana harga sering dibentuk oleh peristiwa-peristiwa dunia. Untuk alasan ini, perusahaan-perusahaan menghasilkan listrik telah membayar lebih untuk gas alam daripada batu bara, nuklir, dan angin. Karena itu adalah yang paling mahal dan begitu berat diandalkan di Texas, harga gas alam menentukan harga listrik Texas.

Membandingkan Gas alam 2009 dengan 2010

Anda mungkin telah memperhatikan musim panas 2010 itu lebih hangat daripada 2009. Menurut EIA penggunaan gas alam untuk generasi tenaga listrik melonjak tahun ini karena dari 23 persen di AS pendinginan derajat hari, mengakibatkan lebih dari 300 Bcf (11 persen) peningkatan konsumsi gas alam di sektor generasi listrik selama 4 bulan terakhir dibandingkan dengan periode yang sama tahun lalu.

Terlepas dari cuaca panas mengemudi permintaan listrik, besar surplus yang masih dalam penyimpanan. Agustus 27 bekerja gas alam inventori adalah 3,106 milyar kaki kubik (Bcf). Sementara ini adalah 169 Bcf lebih dari rata-rata 2005-2009, itu masih 208 Bcf kurang dari tingkat rekor 2009. Juni, Juli dan Agustus juga menyaksikan badai ancaman Bcf 7.9 yang shut-in dan memperlambat produksi. EIA awalnya diprediksi 57.4 Bcf diproduksi untuk periode ini. Sumur-sumur deep-sea gas baru juga disimpan sebagai bagian dari moratorium pengeboran mengikuti bersejarah BP tumpahan minyak di Teluk pada tanggal 20 April 2010. Rekomendasi resmi tentang kapan harus mengakhiri moratorium mungkin akan dirilis pada akhir September.

Horisontal pengeboran gas serpih dan gas alam cair teknologi keduanya datang usia ketika harga gas alam yang tinggi. Perusahaan pengeboran mampu mengambil banyak utang untuk melahirkan sumur baru ke U.S. belum dimanfaatkan luas serpih gas drama. Sebuah contoh menarik adalah Kardell Gas Unit 1 H yang pemompaan dalam serpih Haynesville di San Augustine County, Texas. Kembali pada Oktober 2009, ini baik dicapai laju aliran kontinu 24 jam dari 30,7 juta kaki kubik (Mcf) dengan tekanan aliran 6,824 psi. Sayangnya, angka telah muncul menunjukkan bahwa sumur-sumur gas serpih sangat pendek produsen, menghasilkan jumlah besar di tahun pertama mereka tetapi berkurang dengan cepat atas berikut beberapa tahun. Bagaimana ini akan faktor mempengaruhi industri dalam jangka panjang belum jelas diatasi.

Sayangnya bagi industri, keuntungan tampak berkurang dari sumur-sumur mereka dengan cepat. Itu harga jatuh di pada akhir tahun 2008/awal 2009 dan tetap rendah sepanjang tahun 2010. Gas alam cair impor (baik melalui pipa dan kapal) ke Amerika Serikat telah turun 56,410 juta kaki kubik (Mcf) pada Januari 2010-32, 521 Mcf pada bulan Juli, 2010. Apakah itu hanya tinggal dalam bisnis atau mempertahankan hak untuk acreages, pengeboran perusahaan pengeboran mengebor sumur lebih dan menghasilkan lebih banyak gas - yang mendorong harga turun lebih lanjut. Dave Pursell, managing director dan kepala makro penelitian untuk Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co sekuritas Inc, mencirikan gas serpih terburu-buru menyatakan, "industri ini adalah mabuk minuman keras serpih dan tidak bisa mendapatkan cukup cepat mabuk untuk menghindari mabuk harga rendah komoditas.".

Selama 2012, EIA memprediksi produksi gas alam jatuh oleh 1,2 Bcf (1,9 persen) seperti harga komoditas rendah menerapkan rem untuk pengeboran rig. Beberapa dari ini dapat dihubungkan dengan U.S. gas produsen utama, Chesapeake energi dan sumber daya EOG. Mereka mengumumkan bahwa mereka akan mengurangi operasi gas serpih mereka dan beralih ke mengembangkan gas alam cair operasi. Gas alam cair diekstraksi dalam hubungannya dengan gas alam di permukaan dalam gas pengolahan atau bersepeda tanaman dan termasuk propana, etana, butana, pentana dan bensin alami.

Perairan yang bermasalah: Fracking

Hidrolik patahan, atau "fracking", menggunakan air, pasir dan bahan kimia pada tekanan yang sangat tinggi untuk memecahkan formasi batuan serpih dan mengaktifkan gas alam di deposito serpih untuk bermigrasi ke kepala baik untuk koleksi. Sementara sebagian besar ini dilakukan pada kedalaman yang kebanyakan ahli berpendapat di bawah air, ada bukti di 6 Serikat menampilkan proses ini penuh dengan contoh-contoh yang terdokumentasi metana mencemari aquifiers dan meledak minum air sumur. Masalah telah membuat semua yang lebih kontroversial di mata publik oleh Josh Fox film, Gasland.

Sebagai jawaban untuk masalah umum, US EPA berencana memulai sebuah studi baru pada tahun 2011.

Proyeksi 2011

EIA mengharapkan kondisi cuaca panas dekat normal untuk 2011. Alasannya adalah bahwa efek El Nino kuat 2009 akan memainkan sendiri. National Weather Service memprediksi musim dingin untuk Desember 2010 melalui Februari, 2011 sebagai kering dengan di atas normal temps di Texas dan barat daya kita dengan sebagian besar negara mungkin mengalami "sama kemungkinan kondisi normal". Pola cuaca yang sama diperkirakan melalui April dan masuk ke musim panas dengan suhu yang lebih tinggi kokoh bergerak ke barat daya.

Sebagai consequnce, proyek-proyek EIA datar konsumsi melalui 2011 dengan sebagian besar yang sedang digunakan oleh ekspansi di generasi listrik dan sektor industri - pinjaman beberapa kepercayaan kepada pemulihan ekonomi.

2011 Solusi bagi konsumen energi Texas

Pada bulan Mei, EIA melaporkan bahwa harga rata-rata listrik Texas 11,6 sen/kwh dan akan naik ke sen 11.9/kwh pada tahun 2011. Sejak Mei nyata rata-rata harga telah menurun lebih dari 10 sen/kwh. Ini adalah sebagian faktor harga gas alam mencelupkan rendah selama musim gugur karena untuk temperatur di seluruh negeri.

Itu murah sekarang tapi diharapkan untuk tren atas seperti pemanas musim dingin musim akan berlangsung. EIA pasak yang jumlah $ 4.76/MMbtu. Texas listrik konsumen, ini berarti masih pembeli pasar untuk sementara. Pada tanggal 21 September, harga sore hari untuk pengiriman Oktober di Henry Hub adalah $3,82 / MMbtu. Namun itu adalah masih dunia yang tidak pasti. Kemudian pada hari, harga naik 9 sen untuk $3,91 sebagai pusat badai nasional mengumumkan bahwa badai Atlantik berpotensi mengancam gas rig di Teluk Meksiko.

Bahkan masih, itu adalah waktu yang tepat untuk berbelanja untuk rencana energi tetap yang dapat menghemat uang.

Jika Anda sign in pada rencana dua tahun sekarang, Anda dapat mengunci di tingkat 2010 saat ini rendah jatuh melalui musim gugur 2012. Beralih sekarang ketika harga rendah dapat menghemat ratusan dolar selama dua tahun. Mengapa? Karena Anda dapat mengambil keuntungan dari energi tarif tetap-rencana jangka panjang yang terkunci di harga rendah energi saat ini. Sementara proyek EIA bahwa harga akan menjadi datar pada tahun 2011, harga cenderung meningkat secara bertahap menjelang akhir tahun seperti yang memproduksi gas perusahaan besar, seperti Chesapeake energi (yang menghasilkan 2 Bcf/hari), bermigrasi perhatian mereka untuk produk-produk gas alam yang lebih menguntungkan. Gas alam surplus catatan dalam penyimpanan akan secara bertahap digunakan atas dan tidak segera digantikan oleh produsen. Faktor lain yang mempengaruhi pasar gas alam akan EPA laporan fracking yang mungkin dampak negatif pada biaya produksi masa depan dalam serpih gas drama.

Pertimbangkan September 21 harga $ 3,91/MMbtu dan prediksi EIA gas alam naik menjadi $ 4.76/MMbtu pada tahun 2011. Itu adalah peningkatan 21%. Sekarang, jika rencana energi Anda terkunci di di 10.4/kWh untuk 1500 kWh per bulan, Anda membayar sekitar $ 156/month. Tetapi pada tahun 2011 diberikan kenaikan minimal mungkin 21% dalam gas alam, tagihan Anda bisa melompat dengan itu banyak untuk $ 188.76/month. Itulah perbedaan $ 32.76/month atau $393.12 untuk tahun.

Jangan khawatir. Sekarang adalah waktu yang tepat memaksimalkan tabungan Anda selama ini-dua tahun untuk mengambil keuntungan dari harga rendah saat ini.

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Read More >> Gas alam kekuasaan Texas

Texas Workers' Compensation & Recoupment of Overpaid Benefits - Injured Workers Have The Advantage

One of the hot topics of dispute resolution before the Division of Workers' Compensation these days is recoupment. Recoupment is an attempt by an insurance carrier to recover overpaid benefits from a claimant by reducing the claimant's future benefits by a set percentage until all of the overpaid benefits have been recovered. For years, it was a matter of fairness, and the Division made decisions with respect to recoupment on the basis of equity. The carrier's ability to recoup overpaid benefits has been significantly reduced, and when it can, how much it may reduce benefits may not be based on anything to do with fairness or equity.

THAT'S NOT FAIR!

Recoupment is now governed by Rule 128.1(e). That rule went into effect on May 16, 2002. Claimants made no immediate rush to embrace the windfalls allowed under the rule, and it wasn't until nearly two years later that the rule began to be included with any prominence in the recoupment discussions of the Appeals Panel. This is in part due to the lack of cases that were brought up on the issue. Even since 2004, when the Appeals Panel issued a "significant" decision on the matter, claimants have not aggressively pursued the use of the rule to their benefit. That rule, and the decisions addressing its interpretation, are now becoming widely known, and cases involving recoupment are becoming more common.

Rule 128.1(e) significantly limits a carrier's ability to recoup overpaid benefits. It has been interpreted to limit recoupment only to those situations where the overpayment is the result of a miscalculation in or change of average weekly wage (APDs 033358-S and 060318). The general rule is that in order to recoup overpaid benefits, there must be a statutory provision that allows such recoupment. In APD 060318, the panel noted provisions such as Texas Labor Code 415.008 (concerning fraudulently obtaining benefits), 408.003 (concerning reimbursement of benefit payments made by an employer), and 410.209 (allows reimbursement from the subsequent injury fund for payments made under a Division order which is reversed or modified), as statutory provisions that could allow a recoupment of benefits. But these instances are rare.

The results of Rule 128.1(e) can be rather harsh and unfair, and may certainly be without any consideration of equity. The only "significant" decision on this matter is Appeals Panel Decision (APD) 033358-S. The overpayment in this case resulted from a change made to the average weekly wage when the carrier received the DWC-3 wage statement. It was not received until the claim had progressed halfway through the payment of impairment income benefits (IIBs) based on a fifteen percent impairment rating. The carrier then suspended IIBs to recoup its overpayment on the notion that based on the number of weeks temporary income benefits were owed (TIBs) and the number of weeks IIBs would be owed, and multiplying that number of weeks by the benefit rate due, the amount of benefits the claimant was entitled to receive had already been paid. The panel found that logic to be "nonsensical."

The argument that a claimant will be paid a certain amount of benefits based on the benefit rate and the number of weeks owed is highly logical. For instance, a claimant with a TIBs rate of $250.00 who misses ten weeks of work and has a five percent impairment rating should receive a total of $6,250.00 ($2,500.00 in TIBs + $3,750.00 in IIBs) in workers' compensation indemnity benefits. That makes sense and is easy to calculate. But what if a change in average weekly wage results in a benefit rate of $200.00 and ten weeks of IIBs have already been paid? This means that the carrier has paid a total of $5,000.00 under the prior rate, and the claimant should only receive a total of $5,000.00 in indemnity, and yet there are five weeks of IIBs left to pay. The panel determined that the claimant is legally entitled to the remaining weeks of IIBs, holding that, "the amount of recoupment is a factor in determining the amount of benefits that will be paid to a claimant rather than the amount of recoupment being determined by a predetermined amount of total benefits." This means that a claimant can receive more in indemnity benefits than the calculation of benefit rate times weeks owed would yield because the claimant is legally entitled to benefits for a certain time period based on the impairment rating. If the claimant has a five percent impairment rating, he is owed fifteen weeks of benefits from the date of maximum medical improvement. Any adjustment made to the benefits owed calculation that precludes an income benefit for that legally entitled period runs afoul of the first part of Rule 128.1(e).

This does not mean that an adjustment is not made to allow the carrier to recoup an overpayment resulting from a change in average weekly wage from future benefits. Rule 128.1(e)(2) determines the amount of recoupment that will be allowed. If the claimant's benefits are being reduced to pay attorney fees or to recoup a Division approved advance of benefits, then the carrier is allowed to recoup the overpayment at a rate of ten percent. If the claimant's benefits are not being reduced to pay attorney fees or an advance, then the carrier is allowed to recoup at a rate of twenty-five percent.

In APD033358-S discussed above, the carrier determined that it had paid all of the benefits it owed pursuant to the calculation of benefit rate times weeks owed. It then suspended benefits to recoup the overpayment. In essence, it determined on its own to recoup at the rate of one hundred percent. The Appeals Panel determined that this was inconsistent with the rule. The rule only allows either a ten percent reduction in benefits or a twenty-five percent reduction in benefits, depending upon the circumstances. The rule does not allow a one hundred percent reduction in benefits. That panel ordered a ten percent reduction in benefits because the claimant's benefits were being reduced to pay attorney fees.

OR IS IT?

The problem with the result in APD 033358-S is that the carrier did not avail itself of the protections offered in Rule 128.1(e)(2)(c). The last section of the rule is a return to equity analysis. It allows for recoupment at a rate greater than that allowed in Rule 128.1(e)(2)(A) or (B) if the carrier enters into a written agreement with the claimant, or if unable to do so, by asking the Division to approve a higher recoupment rate. The rule specifically states that the primary factor that the Division should use in determining the rate of recoupment is the likelihood that the entire overpayment will be recouped! It provides that "the rate should be set such that it is likely that the entire overpayment can be recouped." The rule further states that the Division is to also consider the cause of the overpayment and the financial hardship that may be created for the claimant. This is equity analysis.

The bottom line here is that if the overpayment is due to a change in the average weekly wage, that overpayment can be recouped at any rate that the carrier can get the Division to approve, but it must ask for a rate to be set by the Division rather than setting the rate itself. Failure to request a rate from the Division will result in the default recoupment rates of Rule 128.1(e)(2)(A) and (B).

There are procedural questions that remain unanswered by the rule and by the Appeals Panel. How does a carrier request a rate of recoupment greater than the default rates? A quick review of the Division's website shows that there is no form that can be filed for such a purpose. Does the timing of the request matter? Do the default rates control until the date the carrier requests a change in the recoupment rate from the Division similar to a contribution case? Who makes the decision at the Division as to the amount of recoupment allowed prior to a benefit review conference or contested case hearing? Does the carrier have to provide evidence that it sought an agreement from the claimant as a condition precedent to the Division approving a change in the recoupment rate?

There are no answers to these questions, which will surely be litigated in time. It appears that the carrier must attempt to reach an agreement with the claimant before requesting a change in recoupment rates from the Division. There must, then, be a request made to the Division to approve a recoupment rate based on the equities of Rule 128.1(e)(2)(C). At that point, the carrier would be protected by the Rule and in any subsequent dispute resolution proceeding, it would be able to ask for a rate of recoupment greater than the default rates based on equity and fairness.

CONCLUSION

The carrier's ability to recoup an overpayment of indemnity benefits from future indemnity benefits has been limited to a large degree by Rule 128.1(e). The Appeals Panel has determined that in order for a carrier to recoup overpaid benefits, there must be a statutory provision allowing for that recoupment. Rule 128.1(e) only allows for recoupment when the overpayment results from a change in average weekly wage. When this occurs, the default recoupment rates are ten percent or twenty-five percent, depending on the circumstances. If the carrier wants to recoup the overpayment at a rate greater than the default rates, it must request that the claimant agree to a greater rate. If the claimant will not agree to a greater rate of recoupment, the carrier must request that the Division approve a greater rate based on the equities of Rule 128.1(e)(2)(C). If the carrier fails to make this request of the Division, then it will be limited to the default rates of Rule 128.1(e)(2)(A) and (B).

Matt Lewis represents injured workers in the Texas workers' compensation system. He is AV Rated by Martindale-Hubbell, the highest rating possible in competency and ethics. Mr. Lewis is board certified in workers' compensation law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, and serves on the Board's exam commission. In an effort to help workers across Texas, Matt writes the Texas Workers' Comp Blog published at http://www.dallasworkcomp.com/txworkcompblog.html

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Read More >> Texas Workers' Compensation & Recoupment of Overpaid Benefits - Injured Workers Have The Advantage