CovEr STory - Mjunction

Chief Editor
Rakesh Dubey, Tel: +91 91633 48159, Email: rakesh.dubey@mjunction.in
Executive Editor
Arindam Bandyopadhyay, Tel: +91 91633 48016
Email: arindam.bandyopadhyay@mjunction.in
Editorial Board
Alok Srivastava, General Manager, MMTC Ltd
Amitabh Panda, Group Director (Shipping & Logistics Operations), Tata Steel
Group
Anirudha Gupta, Director, P&H JoyMining Equipment India Ltd
Ashok Jain, Managing Director, Saumya Mining Ltd
Deepak Bhattacharyya, Head – coaljunction, mjunction services ltd
Ganesan Natarajan, WT Director, President & CEO, Ennore Coke Ltd
Lawrence Metzroth, Vice President – Analysis & Strategy, Arch Coal Inc
M K Palanivel, President – All India Bulk, Samsara Group
P S Bhattacharyya, Managing Director, Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd
S N Choubey, Head – Commercial, ABG Cement Ltd
Sandeep Kumar, Managing Director, S & T Mining Co Pvt Ltd
Suresh Thawani, Managing Director, Tata Sponge Iron Ltd
Advertising
Soumitra Bose, Tel: +91 92310 00232, Email: soumitra.bose@mjunction.in
Sumit Jalan, Tel: +91 91633 48243, Email: sumit.jalan@mjunction.in
Subscription
Rachita Das, Tel: +91 91633 48045, Email: rachita.das@mjunction.in
Design
Debal Ray, Ishawer Kumar Sriwastva, Sobhan Jas
For suggestions, feedback and queries, please write to
coalinsights@mjunction.in
Registered Office
mjunction services limited, Tata Centre, 43 J L Nehru Rd, Kolkata 700 071
Website: www.mjunction.in
Corporate Head Quarters: Godrej Waterside, 3rd Floor, Tower 1, Plot V, Block DP, Sector
V, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, Tel: +91 33 6610 6100, Fax: +91 33 6610 6187 Bhilai: Room
321, 3rd Floor, Ispat Bhavan, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai 490001, Tel: +91 788 6451066, Tele/Fax:
+91 788 2221071 Bokaro: Room 19, Old Admin Bldg., Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro 827001,
Tel/Fax: +91 654 2226132 Burnpur: SAIL - IISCO Steel Plant, Materials Building, Order
Department, Ground Floor, Burnpur 713325, Telfax: +91 341 2240107 Chennai: Basement,
Begum Ispahani Complex, New No 91, Old No 44, Armenian Street, Chennai 600 001, Tel: +91
44 64624733-35, Fax: +91 44 25216536 Durgapur: Room 618, Ispat Bhavan, Durgapur Steel
Plant, Durgapur 713203, Tel: +91 343 6510185, Tele/Fax: +91 343 2586946 Jamshedpur:
Kashi Kunj, Ground Floor, Road No. 02, Contractors Area, Bistupur, Jamshedpur 831001, Tel:
+91 657 6519985/86/90/91, Fax: +91 657 2230040 Mumbai: Jolly Bhavan II, 403, 4th Floor, 7
New Marine Lines, Mumbai 400002, Tel: +91 22 66510663, Tele/Fax: +91 22 66510662 New
Delhi: C127, 2nd Floor, A One Plaza, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase I, New Delhi 110028,
Tel: +91 11 65661774/65413288, Tele/Fax: +91 11 25897000 Noamundi: C/o TATA Steel
Limited, Mines Purchase Cell, PO: Noamundi, Singbhum (West), Jharkhand 833 217, Tel: +91
9204791638/9234368606 Rourkela: Administrative Bldg., Room 624, 6th Flr, Rourkela Steel
Plant, Rourkela 769011, Tel: +91 661 6514142/6511412
mjunction believes that all junctionites, customers, suppliers, partners, etc should
practice the highest ethical standards in their daily operations.
Report a concern to ethics@mjunction.in
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of Coal Insights can be reproduced or copied in any
form or by any means without the prior permission of mjunction services limited. Please
inform us if any copyright has been inadvertently infringed.
Disclaimer: This document is for information purpose only. Certain information herein has
been acquired from various external sources believed to be reliable. While we have taken
reasonable care to compile this report, we in no way assume any responsibility for any error
or discrepancy in regards to information contained herein. Readers are requested to make
appropriate judgment without any prejudice or compulsion.
EDITORIAL
Dear Readers,
Welcome back to your senses after Budget 2012…!
This year, as in most years, there was something for
everybody…the progressive, the regressive, the moderate,
the excessive. And also for those who are bored with Budget.
Opening the session, the Railway Budget (allegedly) dished
out a ‘drama’ and then the Finance Minister quoted a
(Shakespearean) play. All for the aam admi…!
On a serious note, the Budget 2012 had precious little
for the mining and mineral sector. But of course, the long
standing demand from power producers for removal of duty
on thermal coal import was paid heed to, much to the dismay
of Coal India Ltd (CIL). This could be a turn-off for the coal
miner before an imminent increase in domestic prices planned
for April-May. Leaving this aside, there was hardly any
impact of the Budget on other pure-play miners such as Sesa
Goa, NMDC and MOIL.
As for the power utilities, there are perhaps some reasons
to rejoice. The Budget permitted power companies to tap
external commercial borrowings (ECB) – a welcome move.
The FM, hence the government, also recognised that the power
sector is under duress because of high prices of coal. Why not
straightway provide cheaper domestic coal, then, instead of
trying to make imports cheaper
For CIL, the change in guard is a few days away. If there is
no further twist in the tale, S Narsing Rao would step into the
company headquarters in Kolkata in the first week of April.
The industry is looking up for the quiet man from Singareni
to deliver on the production front. Incidentally, production at
SCCL jumped 40 percent during his tenure.
The ministry, meanwhile, is doing its best to adopt the
carrot and stick approach for the captive blocks. Unfortunately,
it can neither offer nor take away much, except for the notso-attractive
coal blocks. It will be interesting to see how
the companies respond to the auction of around 50 blocks
the MoC has identified for allocation. Talking about captive
allocation, one cannot but be amused at the recent furore in
Parliament over block allocations. The allegations that the
government lost Rs 1,000,000 crore by allocating blocks free
could have some merit. But the fact that these blocks produce
38 million tons (mt) after 15-20 years of allocation makes light
of such accusations.
And still, not every hope is lost. This issue of Coal Insights
brings out a report on the prospects of underground coal
gasification (UCG) in India. UCG is a clean, efficient and ecofriendly
way of using coal that is unmineable. Although there
was not much success initially, the technology holds promise
for the future.
Happy reading,
Warm Regards
Rakesh Dubey
Chief Editor

Contents
16 UCG only way to exploit India’s deep coal
seams
18 Wrong site selection foiled India’s UCG
efforts
24 Thermal coal import prices subdued in
March
25 Spot coking coal prices ease in March
27 CIL may raise prices in April-May
30 Govt. may start auction of new blocks in
May
32 MoC may deallocate 58 blocks
38 Trans Damodar coal block starts
production
39 MoEF may revise norms for washed coal
used in TPPs
40 Union Budget a mixed bag for metals,
mining sectors
41 Budget proposes slew of steps for crisishit
power sector
42 Indian plants generate 70,988.48 MU in
Feb
44 Power utilities’ coal import target for FY13
raised to 70 mt
45 India’s Jan cement production up nearly
10.9%
51 JSPL Odisha coal gasification unit by July
52 RCF, CIL JV to set up coal gasification
unit at Talcher
54 BKT plans 32% hike in production
59 Allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL
companies a national blunder
63 Concern over India’s coal future
64 US coal consumption, production to
decline in 2012: EIA
66 New coking coal mines to benefit Indian
market
68 UK mining equipment makers flock to
Indian shore
70 Dedicated Freight Corridor to be ready by
end of 2017
71 Indian Railways April-Feb commodity
freight revenue up 9.17%
72 Port traffic down 0.74% y-o-y in April-Feb
73 Power sector update
84 E-auction
85 Port data
46 | SPECIAL FEATURE
On the threshold of infinite energy
A new innovation shows the way to
extract carbon from flue gas emitted by
thermal power plants.
Publisher’s Statement
06 | Cover Story
Fuel for the Future
India’s baby steps into the segment of
underground coal gasification hold
promise for the future.
49 | Technology
New biochemical syngas cleaning
mechanism
Innovative offers solutions for
biodesuphurization of H 2
S from syngas
for coal gasification.
Statement about ownership and other particulars about Coal Insights required to be
published under Rule 8 of the Registration of Newspapers (Central) Rule, 1956.
FORM IV
(See Rule 8)
1. Place of publication : Kolkata
2. Periodicity of publication : Monthly
3. Printer’s Name : CDC Printers
Whether citizen of India
: Yes
4. Publisher’s Name : Rajarshi Chattopadhyay
Whether citizen of India
: Yes
Address
: Tata Centre, 43 Jawaharlal Nehru Road
Kolkata 700071
5. Editor’s Name : Rakesh Dubey
Whether citizen of India
: Yes
Address
: Tata Centre, 43 Jawaharlal Nehru Road
Kolkata 700071
6. Names and addresses of individuals : mjunction services ltd,
who own the newspaper and partners Tata Centre, 43 Jawaharlal Nehru Road
or shareholders holding more than Kolkata – 700071
one per cent of the total capital
I, Rajarshi Chattopadhyay, hereby declare that the particulars given above are true to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
Sd/-
Rajarshi Chattopadhyay
Dated: March 2012
Publisher
COAL INSIGHTS 4 March 2012

Cover Story
India’s quest for UCG
Fuel for the future
Arindam Bandyopadhyay
COAL INSIGHTS 6 March 2012

Cover Story
There’s an interesting anecdote about the first discovery
of crude oil in India, at Digboi in Assam, way back in
the late nineteenth century.
In 1867, a large number of ‘natives’ were camping in the
forests of north-eastern tip of Assam to lay railway tracks
for Assam Railway and Trading Co. Ltd. Except for a tiny
habitat nearby, the area was marked as having virgin forest
cover. One day, the loggers who deployed elephants for
hauling found stains of a sticky brown fluid on the feet and
tail of the pachyderm. As they followed the footprints of
the animal, legend has it, the natives discovered a bubbling
liquid oozing out of the forest floor ponging a heavy odour.
Some propounded that the area was not suitable for human
habitation; “Look into the ground, it doesn’t even hold water.”
Some went a step ahead and fancied the land was actually
cursed. It was not until the Canadian engineer overseeing
the project caught sight of the seepage that the crude was
identified and a historic discovery made!
This may be partly true, partly a legend. But such initial
doubts and suspicion are a little too common in case of many
new discoveries and technology applications in this country.
Be it nuclear power, information technology or economic
liberalisation, they have always come with a tag of fear
and apprehension, even though they were tried and tested
elsewhere. Underground coal gasification (UCG) could be the
latest addition to that list.
In common parlance, UCG is an industrial in-situ
gasification process, which is carried out in non-mined coal
seams using injection of oxidants, and bringing the product gas
to surface through production wells drilled from the surface.
The product gas could be used as a chemical feedstock or as
fuel for power generation.
At a time when India is facing stagnation in coal production,
hampering its power sector growth, coal gasification comes as a
viable alternative source of fuel. To go by the experts, only a third
of India’s proven coal reserves is mineable. Coal gasification
technology can help extract the gas tapped in such deposits. By
converting its coal reserves into enough gas and oil, India can
surmount chronic power shortages and halve its energy import
bill of $110 billion a year. Also, UCG has numerous other
usages for chemicals and fertiliser industries and, according to
industry sources, could “ensure future sustainability”.
Unfortunately, the country has been a rather late entrant
into the field. While the technology is decades old, India’s
first commercial coal gasification plant is just about to start
production. In terms of usage of UCG, India lags far behind
China and also some other neighbours. Worse, the country as
a whole seems still not convinced.
UCG and its merits
In simple words, UCG technology converts coal into a
combustible gas underground. The in-situ gasification
produces syngas, which is a mixture of carbon-monoxide,
hydrogen and carbon-dioxide. It has a lesser energy density
than natural gas and is used as a fuel source or feedstock for
the production of other chemicals.
The use of UCG is as old as 150 years or more. The world,
especially Europe and the US, widely used this “spirit of
the coal” for street lighting, set up gas plants, discovered
the chemical composition and refined the technology. Over
the years, a wide variety of appliances and uses for gas was
developed.
As of today, the coal gas has a number of by-products that
are useful for the industry. These include coal tar, sulphur and
ammonia. Dyes, medicines, including sulfa drugs, saccharine
and many organic compounds are derived from coal gas. Coal
tar is subjected to fractional distillation to recover various
products including tar (used in roads), phenol (used in the
manufacture of plastics), cresols (disinfectants), creosote
(wood preservative) and benzole (motor fuel).
By-products of coal gas manufacture
♦♦
Coal tar is a thick black liquid
with high viscosity. It can be
used for roofing jobs; Coal tar
is sometimes used for heating
or to fire boilers. It also has
medical uses.
♦♦
Benzole is obtained from coal tar or coal gas. It is
sometimes mixed with petrol
and is sold as a motor fuel.
♦♦
Creosote is obtained from high
temperature distillation of coal
tar, and is used as a fungicide,
insecticide, miticide, and
sporicide to protect wood and
is applied by pressure methods
to wood products.
♦♦
Phenol is used to make chemical
intermediates for a wide range
of applications, ranging from
plastics to pharmaceuticals and
agricultural chemicals.
♦♦
Cresol is usually derived from
coal tar and wood tar and is
used primarily as a disinfectant.
It also has uses in fermentation
and molecular biology.
COAL INSIGHTS 8 March 2012

DIG DOWN, AND YOU’LL FIND
IT’S A VOLVO TO THE CORE.
Volvo builds better excavators, loaders
and articulated haulers and we are also
one of the world’s largest engine
makers. Engines built to work harder,
for longer.
To need less maintenance. To deliver
more power at lower rpm. So if you’re
using a Volvo excavator, for example,
you don’t have to slow down as you dig
down. With a Volvo under the hood, you
know you’ve got your hands on higher
productivity, lower costs - and more
profit.
Corporate Office:
Volvo India Pvt. Ltd.
Volvo Construction Equipment
#65/1, Parin Building, Bagmane Tech Park,
C V Raman Nagar, Bangalore 560 093
Tel: +91 80 6691 2000
Fax: +91 80 6691 2287
www.volvoce.com
Authorized Dealers
Infra Equip Pvt. Ltd., Dhanbad
Tel: +91 6540 262575
Email: dineshpandey@infraequip.com
Pollutech Engineering, Bhubaneshwar
Tel: +91 674 258 5477
Email: dilip@pollutech.in
Suchita Earthmoving Solutions, Guwahati
Tel: +91 99540 89208
Email: amitabhuwalka@suchitagroup.com
Suchita Millenium Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata
Tel +91 33 2219 7951
Email: raghupatibhuwalka@suchitagroup.com
volvo construction equipment

Cover Story
Sulphur is used in the manufacture of sulphuric acid and
ammonia is used in the manufacture of fertilisers. In fact, coal
gasification is a route for a viable urea-ammonia plant. It is
also an alternative source of fuel for DRI plants and thus can
be used in the secondary steelmaking process.
The major benefit of the UCG technology, as already
mentioned, is that it can be applied to mining resources that
are otherwise not economical to extract. Improved UCG
technology could increase the amount of exploitable reserves
as it helps to gasify deep, thin and low-grade coal seams.
Not only in India, this process could greatly help other coal
producing countries to exploit maximum their coal reserves.
“UCG could increase recoverable coal reserves in the US by
as much as 300 to 400 percent,” said Julio Friedman, who led
the Carbon Management Program of Livermore National
Laboratory, US.
To go by an analyst’s estimate, the syngas produced by
UCG contains about 80 percent of the energy in the coal, while
another 15 percent of the useful energy can be recovered
as steam. “Thus when used in combined cycle mode, the
energy losses during the gasification process are only about
5 percent.” According to some other estimate, about 350 cubic
metres of gas can be produced per ton of coal. The by-products
of significant commercial value are hydrocarbons, phenols,
ammonia and clean water.
UCG also offers an alternative to conventional coal mining
methods. The environmental impact of UCG is less than that
of traditional coal mining, experts said.
Rediscovering the wheel
In India, UCG was never tried on a significant scale. But
globally, the technology saw its ups and downs over the last
150 years. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century,
Advantages of UCG
♦♦
Tapping energy from vast coal reserves which are not
commercially viable to mine
♦♦
Back of the envelope calculations indicate huge energy
potential of about 1,000 MW power generation from a
small block of 25 sq. km, having 10 m thick coal seam
♦♦
Increases worker safety as no mining operations
involved
♦♦
Low environmental impact
• No atmospheric pollution; coal mines involves
coal dust pollution
• No appreciable change in landscape
• Less subsidence than conventional mining
• Less Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) issues
• No surface disposal of ash and coal tailings
• Potential GHG reduction activity (CO 2
sequestration in cavity)
Linc Energy’s UCG plant at Chinchilla, Australia
the world used coal gas to good measure for street lighting,
but discarded it following the advent of electric power.
Another reason for the withdrawal of the technology was
its growing reputation as “ugly duckling”, especially in the
US. The hydrogen gas that is yielded by the process was then
considered as an environmental hazard.
It is interesting to note that the same technology made
a comeback decades later, in the late 20th century, as an
environmentally sustainable process of ensuring energy
security. Much of the world had, meanwhile, changed its
outlook on crude oil, given the depleting reserves and volatile
prices. Oil price spike was seen as an event that would
become more frequent by the day. Many countries without
significant crude reserves started looking for ways to replace
imported oil with secure domestic energy sources, primarily
coal. Hydrogen fuel gained prominence as a prospective
clean energy source. And the world started rediscovering the
potential of UCG.
During the oil crisis of the 1970s, the US Department of
Energy (DoE) took it up on itself to invest heavily in alternative
energy sources, including coal gasification technologies. More
than 30 UCG pilot tests were run across the country. Two sites
in Centralia (Washington) and Hoe Creek (Wyoming) were
developed by Livermore Laboratory, which pioneered in the
study of UCG.
Along with the US, the former USSR made substantial
investment in the technology over the decades and achieved
commercial success too. But it is China which has taken the
lead in UCG of late. The country started investing in UCG
since the 1980s and currently boasts of the largest operating
UCG programme.
With the Middle East crisis flaring up from time to time,
and uncertainty looming over supply of crude and natural gas
from conflict regions, more and more countries are focusing
on this technology. Overall, there are an increasing number of
UCG projects emerging around the world including Australia,
UK, Canada, China, USA, India, Vietnam, Pakistan, Hungary,
Chile and South Africa.
COAL INSIGHTS 10 March 2012

Cover Story
The UCG process
The UCG process has improved
over the years. Earlier, the old
coal gasification processes were
carried out in the absence of air,
partially converting the coal to
town gas with a large residue of
Air Injection
coke. Modern processes convert
all the carbon to a mixture of CO
and hydrogen, commonly called
syngas.
50% Nitrogen
There are three general types 50% CO, H 2
, CH 4
, CO 2
of coal gasifiers, namely fixed 100-180 BTU/SCF
bed, entrained flow and fluidised
bed. All these technologies are
based on partial oxidation or Electrical power genration
gasification of a carbonaceous
& Industrial fuel
feed material.
100-180 BTU/SCF
The partial oxidation reaction
produces syngas containing
CO, H 2
and CO 2
. It also contains
H 2
O, CH 4
, H 2
S, NH 3
and
particulates. In case a fixed bed
gasification technology is used, the syngas will also contain
some organic compounds. There are various technologies for
coal gasification, but essentially all of them employ the same
chemical processes.
Gasification technologies may vary in the way the blowing
is supplied. In case of ‘direct blowing’, the coal and oxidizer
are supplied towards each other from the opposite sides of the
reactor channel.
In contrast, in ‘reversed blowing’, the coal and the oxidizer
are supplied from the same side of the reactor. In this case,
there is no chemical interaction between coal and oxidizer
before the reaction zone.
In the power sector, the Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle (IGCC) plants use a combined-cycle design
UCG salient features
• Under the process of UCG, gasification of coal happens
insitu by controlled burning
• About 350 m3gas can be produced per tonne of coal
• By-products of significant commercial value will be
hydrocarbons, phenols, anhydrous NH3and clean
water
• UCG overcomes hazards of underground and open
cast mining operations.
• In UCG process, ash/ slug removal is not required as
they remain in the cavities
• Cost of production for this energy resource could be as
low as US$ 1.0-1.5 per mmbtu
UCG process diagram
Coal resources
insitu
CO 2
removal
Synthesis Gas
(Chemical feedstock)
300-400 BTU/SCF
(incorporating both gas and steam turbines) to maximise the
benefits of coal gasification. The gas turbine is driven by the
combustion of syngas, while the by-product steam is used
to heat exchange with water/steam to generate superheated
steam to drive the steam turbine.
Current status of UCG
Steam/Oxygen
Injection
100% CO, H 2
, CH 4
, CO 2
200-300 BTU/SCF
CO shift and
Methanation
Synthetic Pipeline Gas
900-1000 BTU/SCF
As mentioned above, China is leading the field in terms of the
number of operating UCG programmes. Currently, there are
more than 12 trials are bring conducted in closed underground
mines in the country.
Elsewhere, the major commercially operated projects
of UCG include Angren in Uzbekistan, Chinchilla in West
Brisbane, Australia and Majuba in South Africa. In the last
10-15 years, a number of European countries including
Netherlands, Spain, Germany and Italy have commissioned
demonstration projects for coal gasification.
In India, the effort to set up coal based industries dates
back to the 1940s. However, the early efforts of UCG did not
taste much success.
Along with technology issues, the pricing of natural gas
affected UCG projects. The commercial success of UCG was
doubted by the coal miners as well as the industry.
The situation started changing for the better in the last
few years. The stagnated supply of coal and limited supply of
natural gas in India prompted the project planners to opt for
this technology.
As of today, the first commercially operated UCG projects
in India are just about to commence, thanks to the pioneering
ventures of JSPL and Reliance. JSPL is going to commence
its Angul plant in Odisha shortly. The Angul project would
COAL INSIGHTS 12 March 2012

Cover Story
Gasification technologies
combine the Lurgi coal gasification technology with a Midrex
plant to use coal gas for producing DRI. JSPL has plans to set
up similar such projects in future, company sources said.
Reliance, on its part, is going to use pet coke for its
upcoming coal gasification project. Another Indian company,
Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertiliser (RCF) has planned to take
up an UCG project at Talcher, Odisha based on Lurgi fixed
bed technology. As for the technology, Indian PSU BHEL has
Major market drivers
According to a report by Frost & Sullivan, the high price
of natural gas is the major driver for the development
of this technology. “It is believed that as long as the
natural gas prices exceed $4 per mmbtu, the technology
could compete with the natural gas based generation
technologies. Also, given the abundant supply of
coal, the prices of coal would be much more stable as
compared to natural gas.”
The high efficiency potential coupled with the low
level of emissions from the IGCC systems has also
attracted the interest of various companies. “Their
efficiency is above 40 percent. Furthermore, these
systems produce little solid waste and close to zero
SOx and NOx emissions. Around 99 percent of the
sulphur present in the coal can be recovered and sold.
The carbon monoxide produced can be reacted with
steam to produce hydrogen and carbon dioxide and
after “sequestrating” the carbon dioxide, the remaining
hydrogen can be used in a fuel cell,” the report said.
developed a technology for fluidbased
gasification process for highash
coal.
Fuel for the future
In a country like India, UCG can open
up new avenues of energy security for
fuel-hungry economy.
For India, the stagnated coal
production, huge unmineable
deposits of non-coking coal, limited
availability of natural gas and
bulging oil import bills are reason
enough to give a serious look into this
technology, which some analysts tag
as the fuel for the future.
“Coal gasification is a very
important technology from many
perspectives – fuel, emissions and
efficiency,” said an analyst. “It is a
perfect technology, once completely
developed and commercialised,
to hedge against the uncertain
availability and price of natural gas. The coal is likely to
become a very attractive fuel for the hydrogen production and
could emerge as a critical bridge towards hydrogen economy
in the coming years,” he said.
Except for the threat to ground water contamination, UCG
is much more environment-friendly when compared with
conventional mining methods.
In fact, coal gasification offers one of the most versatile
and clean ways to covert coal into electricity, hydrogen and
other valuable energy products. A number of coal gasification
electric power plants are currently operating commercially in
the US and other countries. Many experts believe UCG will
be “at the heart of future generations of clean coal technology
plants”.
UCG can achieve extremely low SOx, NOx and particulate
emissions from burning coal-derived gases. In an IGCC, the
syngas produced is virtually free of fuel-bound nitrogen. If
oxygen is used in a coal gasifier instead of air, carbon dioxide
is emitted as a concentrated gas stream in syngas at high
pressure. In this form, it can be captured and sequestrated
more easily and at lower costs.
In terms of efficiency too, UCG scores over typical coal
combustion based power plants, where heat from burning
coal is used to boil water, making steam that converts only a
third of the energy value of coal into electricity.
The India Inc. is slowly looking up to these prospects of
a new form of fuel. Although the government remains tardy
as ever, the corporate sector – both public and private – are
slowly shedding their slackness to peep into the future of the
fuel, or perhaps the fuel for the future!
COAL INSIGHTS 14 March 2012

Cover Story
UCG only way to exploit India’s
deep coal seams
Underground coal gasification (UCG) could be an
alternative source of fuel for some countries, but for
India it is perhaps the only way to exploit the country’s
huge deposit of coal that lies below mineable depths. To go by
a study by the Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research
(CIMFR), the coal deposits lying below the mineable depth of
600 mtrs may be nearly as voluminous as the deposits lying
above the mineable depth.
“In India, the mineable depth is 600 metres. But there are vast
resources below the mineable depth,” said a leading scientist of
CIMFR. While the Geological Survey of India (GSI) estimates 285
billion (bn) tons of coal reserves in the country up to a depth of
1,200 metres, total reserves could be as much as 475 bn tons.
“Altogether, there are 285 bn tons of coal reserves up to
1,200 metres of depth. There is another 60 bn tons of reserves
in another basin below 1,500 metres. There is also substantial
coal in Bengal basin below 2-3 km depth. Overall, India is
estimated to have 475 bn tons of coal reserves, of which only
100 bn tons is recoverable by conventional method mining,”
he said. This coal lying below mineable depth can only be
used via underground coal gasification.
UCG is the partial combustion of coal below to produce a
combustible gas known as syn-gas for use as an energy source.
It is achieved by drilling two wells from the surface, one to
supply air/oxygen, another well to produce syn-gas to the
Coal Insights Bureau
surface. Apart from syn-gas, by-products are hydrocarbon
liquids, ammonia, among others, sources in CIMFR informed.
Hot prospects
Open pit mine Bingham Canyon copper mine in Utah, USA. At 4 km wide and 1.2 km
deep, it is the world’s deepest open-pit mine. It began operations in 1906.
UCG efforts in India
Mehasana in Gujarat in 1980s;
Merta road in Rajasthan in late 1980s;
Bihar (now Jharkhand) in late 1980s;
Gas Authority of India in Rajasthan since 1998;
Neyveli Lignite Corporation since 2002.
In India, Chinakuri coal mine of Eastern Coalfields Ltd (ECL)
is known as the deepest mine, located at a depth 1,400 metres.
There are deeper levels at North and South Karanpura and
Raniganj as well.
There is also huge gas potential at Jharia coalfield, where
the deposit below 600 metres depth is not really explored.
According to some estimate, the reserves up to 600 metres is
14.2 bn tons while the deposit in the range 600-1,200 metres is
5.2 bn tons. Altogether, 19.4 bn tons of reserves are estimated
up to the depth of 1,200 metres.
“All these deeper levels are of interest to us as gas can be
extracted from these levels,” the scientist said.
To explore the potential of UCG in
India, CIMFR has entered into an MoU
with University of California for a trial of
UCG. This, however, requires substantial
funds and institutes like CIMFR are
looking forward to the MoC to grant funds
for UCG trials in the Twelfth Plan budget.
Sources said initially there was a conflict
between MoC and Ministry of Petroleum
and Natural Gas over the ownership of gas
obtained from deep coal seams. While the
MoC maintained that the gas coming off
coal is its property, the petroleum ministry
claimed it should have the ownership
of any gas containing hydrocarbon. An
amicable solution was arrived at later on
whereby the gas available up to mineable
depth will belong to MoC, and the rest
to the petroleum ministry. The mineable
area, as already mentioned, is 600 metres
below ground level.
COAL INSIGHTS 16 March 2012

Cover Story
Wrong site selection foiled
India’s UCG efforts
Coal Insights Bureau
Notwithstanding its rich coal reserves, India is
yet to achieve commercial success in the field of
underground coal gasification (UCG). In fact, the
country is lagging even behind its neighbouring countries
in this respect. While there are various reasons cited for
this failure – technological and economic – a consensus
view is that the project planners failed to make proper site
selection.
In a vastly populated country like India, this was all
the more important given the environmental implications
of this kind of projects. One of the major concerns for
UCG projects is the risk of ground water contamination.
Before taking further steps to tap this resource, the country
therefore needs to mind this important step so as not to
repeat the mistakes.
“All sites are not suitable for UCG. In case of pilots which
failed in the past, wrong site selection was the dominant
reason,” said A.K. Shrivastava, group director, Abhijeet
Group.
“Experience shows that proper site selection, based on
detailed site characterisation, plays a very important role
in the success of UCG. Detailed investigations enhance the
chances of success. But detailed investigations cost a lot of
money. Therefore a suitable primary screening criteria is
needed,” he said.
Echoing his views, Dr P.B. Rastogi, director, Ministry of
Environment and Forests (MoEF), said UCG projects often
lead to groundwater contamination, not only in India but in
sparsely populated countries as well. For instance, he said
the Chinchilla coal gasification pilot project in Australia had
tried to limit outflow of contaminants by maintaining negative
pressure inside the coal combustion chamber, but the attempt
was rather unsuccessful.
“This is a problem that perhaps cannot be solved….there is
no site in India where there is no ground water or water that
will not be consumed,” said Rastogi.
Shrivastava, however, said that risks can be mitigated
through proper site selection. For this, a selection criterion
needs to be chalked out, taking inputs from other countries
and giving due importance to problems specific to the Indian
perspective.
Selection criterion
Shrivastava laid down a number of surface features that may
affect UCG projects. These may include distance from human
habitat, distance from water sources, nature of deposit,
resource base, geology of the deposit,
hydrology of the deposit area,
distance from working or abandoned
mines, and nature and position of the
aquifers.
One of the site characterisation
objectives is to reduce risk of UCG
to acceptable levels. For this, the
project planner needs to use proper
assessment tools for selection and
screening.
Also, plan operations and facilities
are to be based on site-specific risk
profiles. The planners need to evolve
and set operations guidelines based
on verified site parameters. He
also needs to identify the operating
ranges that limit production of
syn-gas, contaminant compounds,
prevent contaminant migration out
of the cavity during and post UCG.
Economics appropriate to UCG site
COAL INSIGHTS 18 March 2012

Cover Story
and appropriate technology for well linking are also crucial,
he said.
Factors that affect UCG design
Thickness, dip and depth
Coal seam geology
Permeability to gas and liquid
Rank (Ash, VM, Carbon content)
Properties of coal
Chemical composition (H2 & S)
Geology, hydrology
Strata & over burden properties
Geo-mechanics & drilling Properties
Operating Pressure, well layout
Operating conditions
Injection composition & flow rates
Thermal, chemical
Process & efficiency
Resource recovery
Volume, flow rate, composition
Product gas
Calorific value, temperature
Impact on environment
Thermal, chemical, subsidence
Selection factors
The various selection factors would affect the projects
undertaken in a number of ways. These could be summarised
under the following heads:
Depth of coal seam: Shallow seams are not suitable for UCG
due to high gas losses, potential for connection to surface and
possible contamination of ground water. Deeper seams allow
higher operating pressure due to higher hydrostatic pressure
which enhances the methane content and thus heating value
of the gas. Deeper seams require guided drilling resulting in
higher cost. Deeper seams are less likely to be linked with
potable aquifers thus avoiding water contamination. The
syn-gas pressure may be adequate for direct use in turbines
resulting in saving on cost of compression. Also, deeper seams
minimise risk of subsidence.
Location
UCG trials – date, depth, thickness
Coal type
Thickness
(m)
Depth
(m)
Year
Lisichanskaya Bituminous 0.44-2 60-250 1948-65
Yuzhno-Abinskaya Bituminous 2.2-9 50-300 1999-current
Angrensikaya Lignite 2-22 120-250 1957-current
Podmoskovnaya Lignite 2.5 30-80 1946-53
Shatskaya Lignite 2.6-4 30-60 1956-63
Sinelnikovsy Lignite 3.6-6 80 -
Chinchilla (Australia) - 8-10 130 1999-2004
Tremeda (Spain)
Sub-bituminous,
lignite
2-5 530-580 1989-98
France Anthracite - 1200 1981-86
Belgium Anthracite - 860 1979-87
Newman Spinney (UK) Sub-bituminous 0.75 75 1959
USA (Hanna 2) Sub-bituminous 6.8 90-120 1973-74
USA (Hoe Creek) Sub-bituminous 7.6 38 1976-79
Australian site selection criteria
♦♦
Seam thickness more than 5 m
♦♦
Coal Ash less than 40% (ADB)
♦♦
Seam dip less than 200
♦♦
Seam depth 200-400 m
♦♦
Minimum faulting – no dip/sills
♦♦
Roof thermally stable with minimal permeability.
Preferably structured to encourage even caving
♦♦
Hydraulic gradient >200 m
♦♦
Adjacent aquifers may contain poor quality water
and are of minimal permeability
Other notes
♦♦
Limited Human activity
♦♦
No waterways over lying the site
♦♦
Subsidence acceptable at the location
♦♦
Coal resource suitable for long time operation
US selection criteria
♦♦
Seam thickness greater than one meter or 0.6 m for
steeply dipping seams
♦♦
Avoid variable thickness seams
♦♦
Avoid seams with overlying coal within 15m that is
thicker than 0.6 m
♦♦
Minimum Resource of 3.5 million tons
♦♦
Minimum over burden of 100 m
♦♦
Minimum distance of 1.6 km from populated area
(>100 people)
♦♦
Minimum distance of 0.8 Km mtrs from major faults
♦♦
Minimum distance of 1.6 Km from oil & Gas
recovery development
♦♦
Minimum distance of 0.4 Km from major highways
and rail
♦♦
Minimum distance of 1.6 Km from rivers and lakes
♦♦
Minimum distance of 3.2 Km from active mines
♦♦
Minimum distance of 1.6 Km from abandoned
mines
♦♦
Steeply dipping seams preferred
♦♦
Floor & roof conditions need closer examination
Porosity & permeability: Higher permeability makes it
easy to link injection and production wells. It increases the
rate of gasification by making transport of reactants easier.
COAL INSIGHTS 20 March 2012

Cover Story
Higher porosity and permeability also increases the influx of
water. Higher porosity increases product gas losses.
Coal seam thickness & dip: Thicker seams contain more
resources for the same area; hence need fewer wells. In such
cases, the drilling costs are lower. In thicker seams it is difficult
to inter link injection and production wells due to drill head
deviation problems. In thin seams, on the contrary, the heat
losses are more and this leads to
lower thermal efficiency and lower product gas quality. It
is difficult to gasify seams less than 2 m in thickness. UCG is
easier to sustain in dipping seams as tars and fluids fly away
from the gasification zone.
Rank, ash, VM & carbon content: The rank of coal plays an
important part. Lignite
and sub-bituminous coals are easier to gasify. Swelling
properties of bituminous coals obstruct the gas passage and
can increase gas losses; hence generally not preferred for UCG.
Higher ash content means lower calorific value of the in-situ
material; hence lower calorific value of gas. The gasification
characteristics of coal play an important role on the volume
and quality of the syn-gas.
Process selection: UCG requires use of coupled process.
Hydrological, geochemical and geo-mechanical models to
capture:
♦♦
balancing gasifier operational pressure against
hydrologic pressure and other gradients in the field to
prevent outward contaminant migration;
♦♦
impact of gasifier operating conditions on creation and
behavior of contaminants within the burn Chamber;
♦♦
enhanced vertical hydraulic conductivity of the rock
matrix above the burn chamber as a result of collapse
and fracturing; and
♦♦
buoyancy-driven upward flow of groundwater in the
vicinity of the burn chamber toward potable water
resources at shallower depth.
Selection criteria in other countries
Shrivastava said the other major coal producing countries
which have pursued UCG have built their own criteria
depending on the local geology and environment conditions.
Among these countries, US, UK and Australia have well
laid down selection criteria for UCG projects. The various
parameters accounted for by these countries include seam
thickness, nature of seams, minimum resource base, minimum
over burden, minimum distance from populated area,
hydraulic gradient, permeability of adjacent aquifers, among
others.
While there are some features common with these
countries, the Indian coal has some peculiarities that are to be
considered while laying down such a list of criteria for Indian
conditions.
“The Indian coals are mostly Permian Gondwana coals.
Tertiary coals are found mostly in the North East. Gondwana
coals are found along distinct river valleys, viz Damodar-Koel,
Son-Mahanadi, Pranhita-Godawari, Wardha , Pench- Kanhan
Valley. Indian coal has high ash content, low sulphur
content, high ash fusion temperature, refractory nature of ash,
low iron content in ash, low chlorine content, and low toxic
trace elements,” said Shrivastava.
Considering these features of Indian coal, the following
selection criteria may be considered for Indian UCG projects:
♦♦
Seam thickness more than 1 m. For banded seams, coal
thickness excluding bands > 1m
♦Minimum ♦ resource of 5 million tons
♦Minimum ♦ depth > 300
♦Inter ♦ seam parting > 30 m for
overlying seam thickness >0.5 m
♦Should ♦ be at a distance of 3Km from
nearest habitat (population >100)
♦Minimum ♦ distance of 1.5 km from
rivers, lakes, reservoirs
♦Minimum ♦ distance of 3.0 km from
working mines
♦Minimum ♦ distance of 1.5 km from
abandoned mines
♦Area ♦ free of excessive faulting
♦Preferably ♦ overlying sealing layer of
clay
♦No ♦ over lying waterways, highways,
Railways
♦Thermally ♦
stable roof for even
caving
COAL INSIGHTS 22 March 2012

coal market fundamentals
Thermal coal import prices subdued in March
The Indian thermal coal market remained subdued
despite some enquiries that took place in March,
according to market participants. Both consumers and
traders are not bullish or ready to take a position in this market
mainly because of financial problems.
The power prices remained low, while coal prices were
high, with the local currency, the Rupee, hovering around 50-
51 to the US dollar, acting as a deterrent to imports.
Australian thermal coal of heating value of 6,300 kcal GAR
is currently being offered at around $106 per ton against $114
per ton quoted at the beginning of March. Offers of South
African thermal coal of heating value of 6,000 kcal NAR fell by
$2 per ton to $103 per ton in March from February end levels.
Offers for Indonesian coal of heating value of 5,900 kcal GAR
is hovering around $92 per ton, while that of heating value of
5,000 kcal GAR is at $72 per ton.
Traders said deals are done only if the coal is required on
an urgent basis. No one is buying to stock the coal, and small
power projects are also buying low grade coal with high ash.
Another reason for the lack of buying interest is that players
Thermol coal price trend in March 2012
Date
South
African
Coal (6000
Kcal NAR)
Australian
Thermal
coal (6300
GAR)
Indonesian
(5900 Kcal
GAR)
Indonesian
(5000 Kcal/
GAR)
Freight
from SA
to West
Coast
From
Indonesian
to West
Coast
Coal Insights Bureau
From
SA to
East
Coast
From
Indonesia
to East
Coast
2-Mar 103.5 113.1 95 73.4 18.7 10.7 20.9 10.2
5-Mar 103.75 111 94.75 73 19.3 10.6 21.8 10.2
6-Mar 103.5 109 94.25 73 19.3 10.6 21.8 10.2
12-Mar 103.25 105 92.8 72.2 19.5 10.75 22 10.2
15-Mar 103 105.8 91.75 71.8 19.5 10.75 22 10.2
are busy closing their financial year which ends on March 31
and preparing their budget allocation for 2012-13.
Indian buyers are quoting prices way below market rates,
citing bids of around $100 per ton fob, for prompt Richards
Bay cargoes against offers of around $105 per ton.
However, according to analysts, thermal coal prices will
remain at relatively high levels over the long term despite
aggressive mine expansions to meet the growth in Asian
demand, particularly from China and India.
Analysts at a recent coal conference felt although there will
be “aggressive” thermal coal supply expansions, steam coal
prices in the long term will defy expectations of a drop and
will instead remain at high levels.
There may be short-term seasonal fluctuations such as the
drop in prices in the current quarter, but the Newcastle reference
coal price for Australian coal will increase progressively,
analysts said. Cost pressures, infrastructure bottlenecks and a
decrease in export coal quality will combine to hold prices at
traditionally high levels and China and India will be the top
two demand drivers. India’s seaborne steam coal demand by
2030 will be 400 million tons (mt) per year from 80 mt in
Critical coal crisis in 18 power units
Coal Insights Bureau
2011, overtaking Japan, according to analysts.
India’s thermal coal demand may be even higher
if domestic coal supply is constrained by delays in
associated rail and port infrastructure projects. Cost
pressures from changing fiscal regimes such as the
carbon tax in Australia and the minimum export price
regulations in Indonesia will also support high thermal
coal prices.
As many as 18 power plants in the country are faced
with critical level of coal shortage, according to
minister of State for Power, K.C. Venugopal.
Of the 89 thermal power projects being monitored, 34
had fuel (coal) stock less than seven days and 25 had less
than four days stock, he said, while speaking in the Rajya
Sabha (the upper house of Parliament).
“None of the power utilities in the country has reported
that any of their thermal power stations are stuck for want
of coal, although inadequate availability of coal vis-a-vis
requirement has affected electricity generation in some of
the power plants,” he said.
Power utilities, he said, have reported a generation loss
of 8.7 billion units in 2011-12 (up to February, 2012) due to
shortage of coal. Listing steps being taken by the government
to mitigate shortage of coal for thermal power plants in
the country, he said Coal India is being asked to enhance
coal production while power utilities have been advised to
import coal to bridge the domestic supply deficit.
As many as 11 plants of state-owned NTPC lost 7.8
billion units because of shortage of coal during the current
fiscal. Other utilities that lost on generation of electricity
included ones in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and
Andhra Pradesh, he added.
The budget announced cuts in import duties on coal.
The basic customs duty on steam coal was cut to zero from
5 percent with countervailing duty reduced to 1 percent
from 5 percent for fiscal 2012-13 or 2013-14. Analysts say
that the effective reduction in import coal cost is close to 9
percent.
COAL INSIGHTS 24 March 2012

coal market fundamentals
Spot coking coal prices ease
Coal Insights Bureau
Spot coking coal prices from Australia eased by about 1
percent in March 2012 when compared with February
2012 owing to lack of buying support from India and
China.
However, the fall was restricted to some extent towards
the end of March owing to heavy rainfall and significant
disruption at several coking coal mines in the Moranbah
region of the Bowen Basin, in Australia’s Queensland.
Premium Low Vol prices slid to $209 per ton fob Australia
in March against $211 per ton at the end of February. HCC 64
Mid Vol, however, also fell by $8 per ton to $189 per ton fob in
one month’s time. The semi soft variety slid by $4 per ton to
$139 per ton in one month’s time.
There was talk that a number of mines in the region were
being impacted, including high-quality coking coal and PCI
mines owned by BHP Billiton-Mitsubishi Alliance, Anglo
American, Peabody and Rio Tinto.
Haulage was being affected by wet mining pits and ramps,
and mines may have to close due to access being cut off for the
next work shift to get to site, according to reports.
The rainfall comes at a crucial time in coking coal contract
negotiations for April-June 2012, between miner Anglo
American and large steelmakers in South Korea and Japan.
The Goonyella rail system in Queensland, a key
COAL INSIGHTS 25 March 2012

coal market fundamentals
Price fixed for Q1
Coal Insights Bureau
An agreement has been reached after price
negotiations with regard to hard coking coal and
LV PCI coal for blast furnace for the first quarter
(April to June) of FY2012.
Out of the above, the first quarter contract price of highgrade
hard coking coal of Queensland, Australian and
Canadian origins is around $205-210 per ton fob, nearly 11
percent less from the previous term (January to March). On
the other hand, the first quarter contract price of LV PCI
coal of Queensland and Canadian origins is around $153.30
per ton fob, 10.4 percent less from the previous term.
As a result of these, the prices of both hard coking coal
and LV PCI coal have been reduced in four consecutive
terms since second quarter (July to September) of FY2011.
Incidentally, the contract prices of high-grade hard coking
coal and LV PCI coal for first quarter of FY2011 were $330
per per ton fob and $275 per ton fob respectively.
The prices have been reduced because of the worldwide
dwindling demand on the steel products attributed to the
economic crisis in the European Union.
The contract price for the fourth quarter of 2011-
12 (January to March in 2012) was $230-235 per ton fob
Australia. Therefore, it becomes a price reduction by around
$25 (nearly 11 percent) from the one for the previous term.
The contract for third quarter (October-December) was
signed at around $285 a ton, but since then the spot prices
had dipped sharply on low demand from European, US
and Chinese steel makers. The contract for second quarter
(July-September) was signed at $315 a ton compared with
$330 for the first quarter (April-June) of 2011-12.
Coking coal prices, which was earlier fixed on yearly
basis, was around $97 per ton fob during 2007-08. The
prices touched a higher of $300 per ton in 2008-09 before
dropping to $129 per ton in 2009-10.
However, prices started rising again from 2010-11 and
the miners started quarterly contract from Q1 of 2010-11
and touched a high of $225 per ton for the fourth quarter
of the year.
Prices peaked to $330 per ton in the first quarter of 2011-
12 owing to floods in the Queensland region of Australia,
but gradually fell to current levels as supply became
normal over time.
Met coke import prices rise
in March
Met coke import prices rose in March on some
rebound in demand from steel mills and
supply constraints of coking coal following
the bad weather in Queensland region of Australia.
The import prices of met coke were hovering
around $385 per ton currently, up from $372 per ton at
the end of February.
LAM coke demand, which is currently at 33 million
tons per annum (mtpa) domestically, is expected to
shoot up to 58 mtpa in the next five years, as steel
makers increase capacity, according to industry
estimates.
transportation link for Bowen Basin coking coal mines was
shut on March 20 after heavy rainfall caused flooding on a
section of the track, operator QR National said. According to
reports, the world’s largest coking coal export port Dalrymple
Bay Coal Terminal was also closed. The likely duration of the
rail closure was unclear.
The Goonyella system links 30 mines to DBCT and Hay
Coking coal & Met coke price trend in March 2012
Date
HCC Peak
Down fob
Australia
($ per ton)
Premium hard
coking coal prices
(premium low vol)
fob Australia ($
per ton)
HCC 64
Mid Vol fob
Australia ($
per ton)
Low Vol
PCI fob
Australia ($
per ton)
Semi soft
coking coal
rates fob
Australia ($
per ton)
Met coke
price cfr
India (($
per ton)
02-Mar 211 211.5 187 149.5 138.5 370
05-Mar 210 210 186 148.5 137.5 367
06-Mar 209 209.5 186 148.5 136.5 366
12-Mar 208 208.5 187 145 134 385
15-Mar 209 209.5 187 145.5 136 385
Point Coal Terminal. However, operations west of Coppabella
remained open, and the Newlands and Blackwater systems
also remained open.
Separately, Peak Downs Highway, the main artery for
shipping fuel and other supplies to the Bowen Basin coal
mines, has also been cut off by the rain, according to reports.
The low demand from India was attributed to a scarcity of
iron ore facing the steel sector. The Indian steel plants are still
reeling under a shortage of iron ore and have reduced its coal
consumption substantially. In 2010-11, domestic steelmakers
imported close to 27 mt of the raw material.
COAL INSIGHTS 26 March 2012

feature
CIL may raise prices in April-May
Coal Insights Bureau
Asked about the likely movement of prices post review,
Perti said, “Whether prices will go up or come down cannot
be said at this point. For that we have to analyse the data first.”
CIL acting chairperson Zohra Chatterji however indicated
the industry may expect a price rise sometime in April. The
industry on its part also expected an upward revision around
that time.
The company was earlier forced to roll back an average
12.5 percent price rise under Gross Calorific Value (GCV)-
based system, on January 31 following severe protests from
domestic consumers led by the power industry. The miner
had decided to do away with the system of pricing based on
useful heat value (UHV) to align with global practices. Under
the UHV system, the highest quality coal in A-grade – with
heat value exceeding 6,200 Kcal/kg – was sold at `4,100 per
ton. Under the GCV system, the highest band coal – with a
calorific value exceeding 7,000 Kcal/kg – cost `4,900 per ton.
After the roll-back, this price was brought down to `4,870 per
ton.
Zohra Chatterji, Chairperson, Coal India Limited
The proposed review of GCV-based pricing system by
Coal India Ltd (CIL) is likely to be delayed by around
a month and may take place in late April or early May
2012, coal secretary Alok Perti told Coal Insights.
“The data will start coming in only from the middle or end
of April. We will analyse the data and then come to a decision
(about a possible revision in prices),” Perti said.
Earlier, the coal ministry (MoC) had announced it would
review the impact of the revised prices on CIL’s revenue
after March. The review was proposed as CIL was compelled
to partially withdraw a “substantial” hike in coal prices
on January 31 due to large scale protest from consumers,
especially the power sector. The problem started after CIL
switched over to gross calorific value (GCV) based pricing
from useful heat value (UHV) based pricing which led to a
sharp increase in coal prices with effect from January 1, 2012.
Analysts foresee 12% rise
CIL, which partly withdrew its coal price hike in February,
may again go for another round of price increase during the
first quarter of 2012-13, an analyst report by BNP Paribas said.
The report stated that CIL may increase its coal prices
by around 12 percent by June 2012. However, “one industry
participant believed that 1QFY13 price hike by CIL will be
limited to 5-6 percent only (vs. our assumption of 12 percent),”
the report said.
“There was also a clear consensus that CIL will be forced to
reduce the supply of higher priced linkage coal to non-power
customers and e-auction volumes to improve availability for
power sector, thus negatively impacting ASPs and margins,”
it added.
Hike needed to offset wage cost
The roll-back in prices on January 31 had eroded CIL’s cushion
against the `6,500-crore impact of wage hike for over 360,000
workers. Some estimates showed the new grading system
would have given CIL an additional `6,250 crore annually.
CIL’s new wage pact signed on January 31 saw an 88
percent increase in minimum basic of its employees to `15,712
per month, as against `8,360 per month during the previous
deal. The other important highlights of the agreement were a
special allowance of 4 percent of revised basic; and HRA of 2
percent of the basic pay for those who have not been provided
with residential accommodation in other than urban area. Post
retirement, medicare scheme for retired non-executives and
COAL INSIGHTS 27 March 2012

Feature
The new and effective prices of CIL following revision
S
No
GCV
Bands
(Kcal/kg)
New Price after
revision on Jan 31,
2012 (For Power
Sector) but effective
from Jan 1, 2012
New Price after
revision on Jan 31,
2012 (for nonpower
sectors), but
effective from Jan
1, 2012
Indicative Grades
(as per previous
classification)
Price/Range as on Feb
27, 2011 (Power Sector)
as per Grades and mine
to mine
Price/Range as on
Feb 27,2011 for nonpower
sectors as per
grades (mine to mine)
Change for
Power Sector
Change for
Other Sectors
1 7000+ * *
2 6700-7000 4870 4870
A 3690 4100 730 to 1180 320 to 770
3 6400-6700 4420 4420
4 6100-6400 3970 3970
5 5800-6100 2800 2800
B 3590 3990 (-)790 to (+) 380 (-)20 to (-)1110
6 5500-5800 1450 1960 C 1050 to 1500 1300 to 1860 (-)50 to (+)450 100 to 660
7 5200-5500 1270 1720
8 4900-5200 1140 1540
D 790 to 1240 1110 to 1560 30 to 480 430 to 610
9 4600-4900 880 1180
10 4300-4600 780 1050
E 730 to 1020 870 to 1080
50 to 150 and
in some cases
(-) 240
100 to 180
11 4000-4300 640 870
12 3700-4000 600 810
F 570 to 610 630 to 860 30 to 70 10 to 240
13 3400-3700 550 740
14 3100-3400 500 680
G 350 to 700 440 to 650 150 to 200 90 to 300
15 2800-3100 460 620
16 2500-2800 410 550
Ungraded NA NA NA
17 2200-2800 360 490
Note: * For GCV exceeding 7000 Kcal/kg, the price shall be increase by Rs 150/- per ton over and above the price applicable for GCV band
exceeding 6700 but not exceeding 7000 Kcal/Kg, for increase in GCV by every 100 Kcal/kg or part thereof.
For WCL, there shall be a 10% add on over and above the price mentioned above for GCV bands not exceeding 5800 Kcal/Kg and below.
All other elements of the ex-colliery delivered price as are presently applicable in terms of the last coal price notification circulated vide ref. no S
& M: GM(F): Pricing: 1907 Dated 26.02.2011 will continue to remain applicable.
For coal produced by the coal companies of CIL including NEC other than non-coking coal, the prices as are presently applicable in terms of
the coal price notification circulated vide ref no. CIL: S&M: GM (F) Pricing 1907 dated 26.02.2011 will continue to remain applicable shown
as under.
COAL INSIGHTS 28 March 2012

Feature
their spouses was to be finalised within three months, ie. April
2012. Overall, the wage hike would result in around 60 percent
increase in CIL’s wage bill (salary, wages and allowances),
union sources said. They said that along with the increase in
basic salary, the annual increment would also go up. In line
with unions’ estimates, the company said that the wage hike
would put an additional burden of `6,500 crore on the firm. As
of March 2011, CIL’s total outgo on employees’ salary, wages
and allowances was `11,715 crore.
“As per the NCWA VIII, which came into effect from July 1,
2006 workers got a raise of 24 percent in the wages, which had
an impact of around `2,500 crore, so this was more than what
they had expected,” R. Mohandas, director (personnel) of CIL
had said. Initially, CIL had offered a hike of 10 percent when
the talks started, while the workers unions were demanding a
50 percent hike.
Going forward, CIL may face another hike in labour cost as
contract workers wages were expected to be settled in April.
This, if implemented, would put additional burden on CIL
and may call for a significant rise in prices to cover the same.
COAL INSIGHTS 29 March 2012

Feature
Govt may start auction of new blocks in May
Coal Insights Bureau
The ministry
of coal (MoC)
is expected to
appoint a consultant
for the auction of new
blocks within the
next couple of weeks
and start the auction
by May-June, coal
secretary Alok Perti
told Coal Insights.
A pre-selection
meeting of MoC and
interested consultants
who had responded to
Alok Perti, Coal Secretary
the EoI floated by the
ministry was held in
Delhi on March 12, he said. The ministry had floated the EoI to
appoint a consultant who would come out with a transparent
and efficient way of conducting the auction.
Asked when the auction process will start, Perti said,
“We would like to
start it as soon as
possible, but we
have to examine the
suggestions provided
by the consultants.”
Overall, the entire
process may take
another two months
to complete, he said,
indicating that the
auction may actually
start in May-June.
MoC identifies 54
Vinod Rai, CAG
blocks
The MoC has identified 54 coal blocks for allotment through
government dispensation route and auction route to public
and private sector companies. “In the first lot, 54 blocks will
be put up for auction and allotment,” Perti said.
COAL INSIGHTS 30 March 2012

fEATURE
However, it was not known how many of these blocks
would be allotted through each route. “I don’t have the breakup
of the numbers right now,” he said.
The ministry has been considering allotment of new blocks
through auction route for quite sometime now, as the previous
system of allotting blocks for captive mining was questioned
from some quarters.
As of today, only 29 blocks of around 194 blocks allotted
for captive production have come to the production stage.
The ministry, on review of the development of the blocks,
found a number of block owners lacking in action to achieve
milestones. This prompted MoC to de-allocate some blocks
and consider auctioning the new blocks so as to attract only
the serious players.
Uproar over CAG report
Meanwhile, a draft report by the Comptroller and Auditor
General (CAG) on allocation of captive blocks by the
government created a furore in Parliament on March 22,
but was later watered down by the statutory authority as
‘preliminary observations’.
A media report which quoted the report titled ‘Performance
Audit of Coal Block Allocations’ said the government extended
undue benefits totalling Rs 10.67 lakh crore to commercial
entities by giving them 155 coal acreages without auction
between 2004 and 2009.
The report evoked hasty reactions from Opposition parties
in Parliament, leading to adjournment of both Houses. When
asked about the report, Coal Minister Sriprakash Jaiswal
refused to make any comment on the report. “I can’t comment
on the basis on any media reports. If we receive the CAG
report, we will analyse it and then take action. I have been the
Coal Minister only in the UPA II and during this time no coal
block has been given,” he said.
The CAG, however, later issued a statement, saying that
the media report on coal mining auction was misleading and
that the draft as still in a preliminary stage.
“In the extant case the details being brought out were
observations which are under discussion at a very preliminary
stage and do not even constitute our pre-final draft and hence
are exceedingly misleading,” a CAG statement on the PMO
site said.
“...Pursuant to clarification provided by the ministry in
exit conferences held on February and March 9, 2012, we
have changed our thinking….In fact it is not even our case
that the unintended benefit to the allocatee is an equivalent
loss to the exchequer. The leak of the initial draft causes great
embarrassment as the Audit Report is still under preparation.
Such leakage causes very deep anguish,” it added.
Earlier, the method of allocating captive coal blocks were
questioned from some quarters. There were also reports of slow
progress in the captive blocks mining projects. Subsequently,
the government decided to hold auctions so as to attract only
serious players.
COAL INSIGHTS 31 March 2012

fEATURE
MoC may deallocate 58 blocks
Coal Insights Bureau
Peeved at the slow progress in various captive coal blocks
allocated to private and public sector companies, the coal
ministry (MoC) has planned to issue showcause notices
to 58 of them, according to minister of state Pratik P. Patil. “The
last meeting to review the progress of the captive coal blocks
and associated end use projects were held on January 11 and
12, 2012. The committee has given its recommendations and it
has been decided to issue showcause notices for de-allocation
to allocattees of 58 coal blocks,” Patil said recently in reply to
a question in Parliament.
Earlier, the ministry had issued showcause notices to
84 blocks on recommendation of the Review Committee.
Based on the clarifications submitted by the allocattees, out
of these 84 coal blocks, 14 coal blocks (12 of public sector
companies and two of private companies) were deallocated,
Patil added.
Participating in the meeting, committee chairperson,
additional secretary of coal, Zohra Chatterji, expressed
concern over the overall progress of captive coal block/lignite
blocks especially for the blocks allotted prior to 2003 and 2004.
She intimated the committee that the government is under
tremendous pressure due to shortage of coal in the country
and no further time can be lost in the development of blocks to
meet the demand and supply gap of domestic coal.
She also urged the state governments to enhance their
co-operation with the block allocattees in order to clear
the pending major milestones in a time-bound manner.
She further requested the state governments to resolve
law and order problems promptly and to extend necessary
assistance for deployment of security camps as per local
requirement.
At the review meeting, additional chief secretary,
government of Jharkhand, assured all necessary assistance for
speedy disposal of pending issues at the state level. The target
of coal production of 36.15 million tons (mt) for 2011-12 (the
terminal year of Eleventh Five Year Plan) and 39.2 mt for 2012-
13 (the first year of Twelfth Plan) needs to be achieved.
Joint Secretary (Coal) advised all the allocattees to push
their projects for early clearance of pending milestones. He
requested the Ministry of Power (MoP) to closely monitor
the upcoming power projects as well as coal projects
allotted for power generation. He also advised the owner
of those coal blocks which were rejected earlier for forest
clearance by the Ministry of Environment and Forest
(MoEF) because of ‘No Go Categorisation” to pursue their
forest clearance proposal with the State Forest Departments
for further consideration. The Coal Controller was directed
to give information on opening of “Escrow Accounts” and
approval of Mine Closure Plan of captive coal blocks from
the next review meeting.
General recommendations
During the review of the progress of coal and lignite
blocks, the major issues causing delay and action points for
reducing the delay in various clearances were identified. The
decisions/issues and recommendations were categorised
under various heads, including environment and forestry
clearances, issues pertaining to state governments, policy
issues and other issues.
Issues relating to E&F clearances
♦♦
The decision taken by GoM at its meeting held on July,
2011 has not percolated to field level.
♦♦
MOEF may be requested to issue guidelines as per the
decision of the GoM’s meeting
Year of allocation
Source: MoC
Allocation of captive blocks
No of blocks to govt. companies No of blocks to govt. companies No of blocks
Net allocated
Net allocated to UMPP/for
Gross De-allocated/
Gross De-allocated/
blocks as on
blocks as on tariff based
allotted surrendered
allotted surrendered
date
date bidding
Total net
blocks for
the year
Till 2003 17 - 17 24 2 22 - 39
2004 4 - 4 1 1 0 - 4
2005 8 2 6 16 1 15 - 21
2006 32 6 26 15 - 15 6 47
2007 34 6 28 17 1 16 1 45
2008 3 1 2 20 2 18 1 21
2009 1 1 - 12 - 12 3 15
2010 - - - - - - 1 1
2011 (Dec 2011) 1 - 1 1 - 1 2
Total 100 16 84 106 7 99 12 195
COAL INSIGHTS 32 March 2012

fEATURE
♦♦
held on July, 2011 to the regional/field offices of MOEF on
Go/No Go issues.
♦♦
In view of the decision of the GoM, cases which had
stopped being processed due to
♦♦
Go-No Go concept may be taken up by the block allottees
again with the State Forest
♦♦
Departments afresh and their pending applications may be
processed by concerned
♦♦
Forest Departments/MoEF without delay.
♦♦
The block allocattees in the state of Jharkhand are facing a
serious problem in forest
♦♦
clearance issues at the State level as individual applicants
are being asked to report on the environmental impact on
the entire forest belt in North Karanpura/Hazaribagh as
a whole. State Govt. representative was requested to take
decision on forest clearance proposals independently on
a case to case basis. Impact on the forest belt as a whole
could be better assessed by State Forest Department.
♦♦
Block allocattees should redefine boundaries in
consultation with State Forest departments in the case of
coal blocks falling in buffer zone or under National Tiger
Reserve Forest area and subsequently move forward for
forest clearance to MOEF. In case this is not possible Blocks
may be de-allocated.
Issues pertaining to state governments
♦♦
State governments should adhere to the time schedule of
24 months or the time schedule prescribed in allocation
condition from the date of allocation for granting of mining
lease of captive coal blocks.
♦♦
The block allocattees in the state of Orissa are facing a
serious problem regarding land acquisition and grant of
mining lease due to the issue raised by Orissa Govt. for
supplying of 33 percent reject based free power to the State
Govt. There is no clear cut policy in this regard. Committee
asked representative of Govt. of Orissa to issue guidelines
in the matter not to hold up clearances on this account
till a policy is formalised in consultation with Ministry of
Power.
♦♦
The block allocatees in the state of Jharkhand are facing a
serious problem on law and order issues. The representative
of State was requested to look into the matter and to
ensure full security by deploying CRPF camp as and when
requested.
♦♦
Rehabilitation and Resettlement issue and issue of
notification under section 4 of LA Act, at the State Govt.
level in case of land acquisition should be settled on
priority basis.
Miscellaneous policy issues
♦♦
As the block allocattees are facing serious problems
regarding transfer of land from subsidiary companies of
CIL under CBA Act, Committee advised that subsidiary
coal companies of CIL should urgently transfer the land
rights under CBA Act to state government/coal block
allocattees. Necessary guidelines to be issued, if necessary.
♦♦
Decision on reduction of GR cost whenever required
should be taken by CMPDIL in consultation with Ministry
of Coal on priority basis.
♦♦
Transfer of surface right and mineral right of land acquired
by subsidiary coal companies of CIL to the block allocattees
is sometimes a major cause of delay. Committee urged
Ministry of Coal to issue concrete guidelines in this regard.
♦♦
Attention is needed for early settlement of bipartite
agreement between subsidiary coal companies and block
allocattees without delay.
♦♦
Pending issues of Mine Plan approval and previous
approval under section 5(1) of
♦♦
MMDR Act in case of grant of mining lease on priority
basis need to be cleared expeditiously.
♦♦
In a case of West Bengal, there is a problem due to
overlapping of area for CBM with coal block. Ministry
of Petroleum and Natural Gas has accorded permission
to extract CBM from the allocated coal block and due to
absence of any guidelines, the coal block allocattees are
unable to go ahead with the extraction of coal. Ministry
of Petroleum and Natural Gas may be requested to issue
policy guidelines in order to resolve the overlap issues.
♦♦
Committee observed that some block owners are willfully
delaying the achieving of pending milestones of coal block
and EUPs. Committee viewed it seriously and recommended
that deduction should be made from the Bank Guarantee
corresponding to slippage as per provisions contained
in the allocation condition. In this regard, the Ministry of
Coal may consider framing policy guidelines regarding
quantum of deduction over period of delay.
♦♦
Committee observed that every allocatee is required to
open an Escrow Account with Coal Controller for mine
closure prior to opening of mines as per procedure laid
down in the guidelines of approved Mine Closure Plan.
Compliance may be specifically reported in the next review
meeting.
Other issues
♦♦
One coal block in the state of West Bengal is facing a
serious problem due to construction of Aerotropolis /
airport project within the coal block areas. Construction
of Aerotropolis is going on the coal block area though the
matter is subjudice before the Hon’ble Court. Committee
recommended that the State Govt. may be advised to
immediately stop construction of Aerotropolis and to
intimate the court accordingly.
♦♦
In order to sort out the problem faced by block allocatees,
close monitoring with the concerned state government and
MoEF at the level of Ministry of Coal /Coal Controller
may be initiated. Regular meetings with Coal Controller/
COAL INSIGHTS 33 March 2012

fEATURE
Ministry of Coal and representative of state and Central
governments may be organised every three months.
Forming a monitoring sub-committee in this regard at the
ministry level may be considered.
♦♦
Joint venture companies formed by the joint allocattees are
required to submit a compliance status of Coal Block and
associated EUPs of individual allocates to CCO by fifth of
the next month after every quarter. Block allocattees were
advised to submit the progress reports and renewed BG to
CCO without any lapse.
♦♦
All the allocatees were advised that BG should be
submitted by the JVC in case of jointly allocated coal
blocks. Individual submission of BGs will not be accepted.
From the reported progress, it is seen that production
from a few coal blocks will be started in the year 2011-2012
or the near future as per the indicated schedule. It is the
recommendation of the Committee that the allocatees of these
coal blocks be advised to start mining or coal production in
2011-12 or as per the indicated schedule of production failing
which appropriate action will be initiated.
The progress of the following blocks was not found to be
satisfactory but it is seen that these blocks were delayed due
to ‘Go/No Go’ categorisation, location in wildlife corridors,
allocation to PFC for UMPPs and overlapping of coal bearing
Blocks which have started production and
attained peak rated capacity
Sl No Name of coal blocks Allotment year Name of allocate/JV
1 Talabira-I 1994 Indal/Hindalco
2 Tata (East) 1996 WBSEB/BECML
3 Tara (West) 1996 WBPDCL/BECML
4&5 Gotitoria (E&W) 1996 BLA Industries
6 Gare Palma IV/1 1996 JSPL
7 Gare Palma IV/5 1996 Monnet Ispat
8 Panchwara Central 2001 PSEB
9 Chotia 2003 Prakash Industries
Blocks which have started production but not
attained peak rated capacity
Sl No Name of coal block Allotment year Name of allocattee/JV
1 Sarshatali 1993 CESC/ICML
2-3 Gare Palma IV/2&3 1998 Jindal Power
4 Gare Palma IV/4 1999 Jayaswal Neco
5 Namchik Namphuk 2003 Arunachal PMDCL
6-11 Baranj I-IV, Kiloni and 2003 KPCL
Manora Deep
12 Gare Palma IV/7 2000 RASL now SEML
13 Barjore 2003 WBPDCL/BECML
14 Kathautia 2003 Usha Martin
15 Tasra 1996 SAIL (IISCO)
16 Barjora North 2005 DVC
17 Belgaon 2005 Sunflag Iron & Steel
18 Parbatpur Central 2005 Electro Steel Casting
19 Marki Mangli-I 2004 B S Ispat
20 Marki Mangli-III 2005 Shree Virangana Steel
area with CBM/Aerotropolis project. Committee expressed
concern over unsatisfactory progress and advised the
allocattees whose blocks were held up due to location in No-
Go area to pursue their forest diversion proposals since Go/
No-Go concept has been done away with. The Committee has
also advised the other allocattees to pursue their cases with the
concerned authorities and get the requisite forest clearances
expedited.
Captive blocks nearing coal production stage
Sl No
Name of coal
block
Allocation date/
target date of
production
Name of allocattee
1
Trans Damodar
(govt. dispensation)
14.1.05/Mar 2009 WBMDTC (Govt PSU)
2 Khagra Joydev 3.3.05/Mar 2008 DVC (Govt PSU)
3 Sial Ghogri
22.5.07 (revised to
22.8.07)/ Feb 2012
Prism Cement (private)
4-5
Marko Mangli-II &
Marki Mangli-IV
6.9.05/Mar 2009
6 Utkal-C 29.5.98/Nov 2001
7-8
Parsa (East) &
Kanta Basan
25.6.07/Sept 2012
19.5.07/Sept 2012
9 Panchwara North 26.4.05/May 2011 WBPDCL
10
11
Durgapur II/
Taraimar
Gare Palma
Sector-III
6.11.07/Normative
date re-fixed on
May 2012
12.11.08/May 2012
12 Fatehpur East 23.1.08/Oct 2013
13 Ganeshpur 28.5.09/Nov 2013
14-15
Sahapur (East) &
Sahapur (West)
25.7.07/April 2014
16 Bicharpur 25.7.07/April 2014
17
Marki Zari Jamani
Adkoli
2.8.06/June 2013
18 Andal East 3.7.09/April 2015
Topworth Urja & Metals
Ltd (formally Shree
Virangana Steel)
Utkal Coal Ltd (formally
ICCL)
Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut
Utpadan Ltd
Balco
Goa Industrial
Development Corp
JLD Yavatmal Energy,
RKM Powergen Ltd,
Vandana Vidyut,
Visa Power, Green
Infrastructure
Tata Steel & Adhunik
Thermal Energy
NMDC
Madhya Pradesh State
Mining Corp. Ltd
MSMCL
The progress of 58 blocks* was not found to be satisfactory.
The Committee expressed concern over unsatisfactory
progress and advised to expedite the development of the coal
blocks and be cautioned to be careful in future with respect
to the milestones stipulated. If they do not improve the
performance on the speedy development of the block further,
action including deduction of BG or deallocation would be
considered.
*The complete list of 58 captive blocks is given overleaf.
Bhusan Steel, Jai Balaji
Industries Ltd, Rashmi
Cements
COAL INSIGHTS 34 March 2012

Feature
COAL INSIGHTS 35 March 2012

Feature
COAL INSIGHTS 36 March 2012

Feature
COAL INSIGHTS 37 March 2012

fEATURE
Trans Damodar coal block starts production
Sumit Kedia
The Trans-Damodar Coal Block (TDBC), which had
been allocated to state agency West Bengal Mineral
Development & Trading Corporation Limited
(WBMDTCL) by Union Coal Ministry in 2005 for extraction,
distribution and marketing of coal, has started production. Coal
reserves at the block stands at around 103.15 million tons (mt).
The TDBC on February 24, 2012, floated an advertisement
offering coal from its block. The coal will be offered through
e-auction platform to Micro & Small Enterprises Sector and
General Industrial Consumers located within West Bengal.
As per the state dispensation policy of the Ministry of Coal,
the WBMDTCL had been allocated six coal blocks viz., Trans-
Damodar at Bankura, Jaganathpur A, Jaganathpur B, Kulti,
Sitarampur and Ichhapur – all at Bardhaman.
According to the Geological Survey of India, total coal
reserves at these six blocks stands at 1307.15 million ton (mt),
of which Ichhapur with an area of 10 sq. km and Kulti with
an area of 7.5 sq. km, contribute 335 mt and 210 mt of coal
respectively. Coal reserves at Jagannathpur A, having area of
11.68 sq. km & Jagannathpur B having an area of 8.15 sq. km
are found to be at 273 mt and 176 mt, while Sitarampur with
an area of 8.0 sq. km, has coal reserves of 210 mt.
WBMDTCL, the wholly owned government of West Bengal
undertaking, under commerce & industries department, was
incorporated in the year 1973. It has been engaged in the
field of mining and trading of mineral resources like rock
phosphate, blackstone, granite, quartz and fireclay spread
over mostly in the districts of Bardhaman, Bankura, Birbhum
and Purulia. Coal, which was practically under the exclusive
purview of Central government sectors after nationalisation,
was not worked by the corporation till this sector was opened
up recently for state PSUs, under new coal mining policy of
the government of India.
The TDCB is the only state owned coal block to reach
production stage and is spread over an area of about 8 sq.
km out of which 694 acres will be mined through Open Cast
Method (OCM). The block is situated in the South Eastern part
of Raniganj Coalfield in the District of Bankura, West Bengal.
This project under the PPP model is taken under a competitive
bidding by a joint venture of three companies, namely,
Godavari Commodities Ltd. (GCL), Banowari Lal Agarwal
Pvt Ltd. (BLAPL) and Calcutta Industrial Supply Corporation,
a partnership firm.
Captive blocks allocated to WBMDTC
Name of the
party
Date of
Allotment
Sl.No.of
the block
allocated
Indiviudal
(I) Jointly
(J)
Block
allocated
Coal
fields
State
Private (P) /
Govt. (G)
End -Use
Captive
Dispensation=cd,
Govt. Disp.=gd,
Ultra Mega Power
Proj. (UMPP)
State of
End Use
Pland
(EUP)
Geological
Reserves
Mt
Status of
Exploration
West Bengal
Mineral
Development
Trading Corp.
14.01.2005 47 I
Trans
Damodar
Damodar
Raniganj
West
Bengal
G Commercial gd
West
Bengal
103.15 E
West Bengal
Mineral
Development
Trading Corp.
02.08.2006 115 I Ichhapur Raniganj
West
Bengal
G Commercial gd
West
Bengal
335 RE
West Bengal
Mineral
Development
Trading Corp.
02.08.2006 116 I Kulti -
West
Bengal
G Commercial gd
West
Bengal
210 RE
West Bengal
Mineral
Development
Trading Corp.
25.07.2007 146 I
Jaganathpur
A
Raniganj
West
Bengal
G Commercial gd
West
Bengal
273 RE
West Bengal
Mineral
Development
Trading Corp.
25.07.2007 147 I
Jaganathpur
B
Raniganj
West
Bengal
G Commercial gd
West
Bengal
176 RE
West Bengal
Mineral
Development
Trading Corp.
27.12.2007 174 I Sitarampur Raniganj
West
Bengal
G Commercial gd
West
Bengal
210 E
Source: MoC
COAL INSIGHTS 38 March 2012

fEATURE
MoEF may revise norms for washed coal
used in TPPs
Coal Insights Bureau
The ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) is
“thinking” on the line of revising the norms for use of
washed coal in thermal power plants (TPPs), a ministry
official said.
The existing norms allow the use of maximum 34 percent
ash coal (on annual average basis) for utilities located beyond
1,000 km from pit head or in critically polluted and ecologically
sensitive areas or in urban areas.
Under the proposed norms, the distance criterion will
be reduced to 500 km from the pit head. Also, the reference
census for identification of urban areas will be the latest
one instead of 1991 census. Additionally, the measurement
would be changed to monthly/daily average from the current
practice of annual average.
The justification behind the proposals is that the cost
of carrying coal to a distance of say 1,000 km is not found
economical if the coal contains excessive ash content. If the
distance criterion is reduced, the TPPs will benefit in terms
of getting higher quality coal which in turn would reduce
the effective cost incurred on carrying coal to the plants.
This will also help reduce the pollution and hence benefit the
environment, the official said.
These measures, however, are currently at the level of
“thinking” and would be finalised only through discussion
with various stakeholders, he added.
Captive units under ambit
The ministry is also planning to apply its norms for the use
of washed coal in TPPs to large captive power plants, MoEF
sources said.
“Not only the thermal power stations, the ministry is
considering bringing captive power plants of 100 MW capacity
and above under the ambit of notification,” the sources said.
Asked to comment on the proposals, the Independent
Captive Power Producers Association (ICPPA) said the
measures, while looking well meaning, may not be practical
as far as the ash and distance criteria are concerned.
“What will they do if a plant located at 1,000 km from pit
head does not get the stipulated quality of coal Will they close
down the plant” ICPPA sources said. “The ministry needs to
look at all aspects before finalising its proposals,” they added.
Pilot ETS scheme
Meanwhile, the MoEF has also planned to launch the pilot
emission trading scheme (ETS) scheme in India. The official
said the objective of the ETS will be to control the particulate
matter (PM). To start with, pilot ETS will be carried out in
three states, namely Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat.
In Maharashtra, five cities and clusters will be brought
under the ETS coverage, namely Aurangabad, Tarapur,
Chandrapur, Jhalna and Kohlapur. The selected industries
will be large or medium, have at least one CEMS in suitable
stack and be the highest emitters of PM.
In Tamil Nadu, the clusters would include Ambattur,
Chennai, Maraimalai, Sriperumpudur and Tiruvallur. Selected
industries will lie within 50 km radius of Chennai city, be large
or medium and will have at least one CEMS suitable stack.
In Gujarat, cities like Surat, Vapi and Ahmedabad will
be monitored under the scheme. Selected industries will lie
within a 20 km radius of the respective city, have at least one
CEMS suitable stack and be the highest emitters of PM.
Status of pollution in industrial clusters
No Industrial cluster/area Air Water Land
Comprehensive
Environmental
Pollution Index
(CEPI)
1 Ankleshwar (Gujarat) 72.00 72.75 75.75 88.50
2 Vapi (Gujarat) 74.00 74.50 72.00 88.09
3 Ghaziabad (Uttar Pradesh) 68.50 75.25 71.50 87.37
4 Chandrapur (Maharashtra) 70.75 67.50 66.50 83.88
5 Korba (Chhattisgarh) 67.00 57.00 72.50 83.00
6 Bhiwadi (Rajasthan) 71.00 69.00 59.50 82.91
7 Angul Talcher (Orissa) 64.00 69.00 65.75 82.09
8
Vellor (North Arcot)
Tamilnadu)
69.25 65.25 62.50 81.79
9 Singrauli (Uttar Pradesh) 70.50 64.00 59.50 81.73
10 Ludhiana (Punjab) 68.00 66.00 64.75 81.66
11
Nazafgarh drain basin
(including Anand Parvat,
Naraina, Okhla and
Wazirpur), Delhi
52.13 69.00 65.25 79.54
12 Noida (Uttar Pradesh) 65.75 64.00 60.00 78.90
13 Dhanbad (Jharkhand) 64.50 59.00 65.50 78.63
14 Dombivalli (Maharashtra) 66.00 63.50 57.50 78.41
15 Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) 66.00 63.50 56.00 78.09
Source: MoEF
COAL INSIGHTS 39 March 2012

fEATURE
Union Budget a mixed bag for metals,
mining sectors
Coal Insights Bureau
The Union Budget 2012-13 was a mixed bag for the
metals and mining sector. While the increase in
excise duty would be marginally negative for metal
producers, exemption from import duty on coal would be
slightly positive for thermal coal importers, including nonferrous
metal producers, JSW Steel and some sponge iron
producers.
Moreover, the increase in customs duty on non-alloy flatrolled
steel from 5.0 percent to 7.5 percent would be slightly
positive for flat steel producers.
Expectations
• Increase in import duty on steel from the current level of
5 percent.
• Removal of import duty/CVD on thermal coal from
current levels of 5 percent/5 percent.
• Hike of excise duty to 12 percent, from 10 percent.
Announced measures
• Excise duty has been raised to 12 percent, as expected.
• Import duty on flat steel products has been increased to 7.5
percent, from 5 percent.
• For the infrastructure (mainly power) sector, import duty
on thermal coal has been removed, while CVD has been
reduced to 1 percent, from 5 percent.
Impact: A mixed bag
• Higher import duty on flats positive for steel companies.
The increase in import duty on flat steel to 7.5 percent
(from 5 percent) is positive for domestic steel companies.
• Flat steel producers should benefit from this development
while margins for long steel producers would not decline.
JSW Steel should benefit the most as flat products
contribute 75-80 percent to its volumes, followed by SAIL
(flat steel represents 55-60 percent volumes) and Tata
Steel (flat steel accounts for 55-60 percent of domestic
volumes).
• Hike in excise duty is negative for non-ferrous companies.
The hike of excise duty to 12 percent (from 10 percent)
is negative for non-ferrous companies, as their net
realisations will now decrease accordingly. Hindalco and
Sterlite should be most impacted from this move, followed
by Nalco and Hindustan Zinc.
• Removal of import duty/cut in CVD on thermal coal
is negative for Coal India. Removal of import duty
(currently 5 percent) on thermal coal and the cut in CVD
to 1 percent (from 5 percent) are negatives for Coal India
as its e-auction realisations will decline with the decline in
landed cost of imported coal. E-auction contributes about
10 percent to Coal India’s volumes and 40-45 percent to
EBITDA.
• No substantial impact on pure-play miners. Pure-play
miners such as Sesa Goa, NMDC and MOIL should see
little impact from the changes proposed in the Union
Budget.
Metals
Announcement
Increase in excise duty from the current level of 10% to 12%.
Full exemption from import duty on thermal coal (5% currently) up to FY2014 and
decrease in countervailing duty from 5% to 1%.
Decrease in basic customs duty on machinery from 7.5% currently to 2.5% for
setting up iron ore beneficiation and pellet plants.
Increase in customs duty on non-alloy flat-rolled steel from 5.0% to 7.5%.
Decrease in import duty on machinery used for prospecting in mining from
10.0/7.5% to 2.5%; Abolition of customs duty for coal mining projects.
Impact
This would be slightly negative for steel, sponge, non-ferrous metal producers.
This would be positive for coal importers, such as Nalco, Hindalco, Sterlite
Industries and JSW Steel.
This would be slightly positive for steel makers setting up pellet and beneficiation
plants.
This would be slightly positive for flat steel producers, such as Bhushan Steel,
SAIL, JSW Steel and Tata Steel.
Positive for mining companies and steel companies undertaking mining projects.
COAL INSIGHTS 40 March 2012

fEATURE
Budget proposes slew of steps for
crisis-hit power sector
Coal Insights Bureau
The government has proposed a slew of steps including
customs duty exemption on imported fuel and lower
levy on overseas funds for projects to provide relief to
crisis-hit power sector.
Unveiling various proposals for the power sector in the
Union Budget 2012-13, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee
said that, "In power generation, fuel supply constraints are
affecting production prospects".
Permitting power companies to tap External Commercial
Borrowing (ECB) route to part re-finance rupee debt on power
plants and increasing power sector's tax-free bonds limit to
`10,000 crore from `5,000 crore are also among the Budget
proposals.
"Producers of thermal power have been under stress
because of high prices of coal. I propose to ease the situation
by providing full exemption from basic customs duty and a
concessional CVD of 1 percent to steam coal for a period of
two years till March 31, 2014," Mukherjee said in his Budget
speech. At present, imported coal attracts a customs levy of
around 5 percent.
Full basic duty exemptions would be extended to power
plant fuels such as natural gas and Liquefied Natural Gas
(LNG), uranium concentrate, sintered uranium dioxide in
natural and pellet form.
In a move that would reduce overall debt cost, withholding
tax on ECB would be cut to 5 percent from 20 percent for three
years. Further, the last date for power generating projects
to seek tax holiday has been extended by one more year till
March 31, 2013.
"Additional depreciation of 20 percent in the initial year
is proposed to be extended to new assets acquired by power
generation companies," Mukherjee said. "There are signs of
recovery in coal, fertilisers, cement and electricity sectors.
These are core sectors that have an impact on the entire
economy," he said.
The Association of Power Producers (APP), a group of
about 22 private entities, said the budget proposals announced
would go a long way in incentivising the power sector and
benefiting the end consumer.
These proposals come against the backdrop of severe fuel
shortage as well as funding issues hurting the power sector,
which is expected to see a capacity addition of over 80,000
MW in the Twelfth Plan (2012-17).
Power
Announcement
Waiver of basic custom duty on coal
Extension of tax exemption under 80-IA for power generation
companies until FY2013.
Impact
Waiver of basic custom duty on coal is a substantial positive for many private sector power generators,
such as Adani Power and JSW Energy, who rely on imported coal for running their plants.
As per Section 80-IA exemptions, ower plants are eligible for a tax holiday of 10 years from the year
of commissioning of the plants. The exemption under this section was applicable to power plants
commencing operations before FY2012 and has now been extended until FY2013. However,
companies have to pay tax under MAT provisions. Extension of 80-IA benefits would have a positive
impact on private sector power generation companies. Some of the companies, which would majorly
benefit include Adani Power and Tata Power
Some other positive announcements for the power sector include tax-free bonds worth `10,000cr for financing the power sector, allowing ECBs to part finance rupee
debts of existing power projects and reduction of withholding tax on interest payments on ECBs from 20% to 5%. In all, the budget is expected to have a positive impact
on the power sector.
COAL INSIGHTS 41 March 2012

fEATURE
Indian plants generate 70,988.48 MU in Feb
Sanjukta Ganguly
Power generation by Indian power plants in February
2012 stood at 70,988.48 MU against a target of 68,542.65
MU for the month, according to provisional data made
available by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA).
The generation in February 2012 was also higher compared
to 65,708.32 MU generated during the corresponding month
of the previous year. The target set for February 2011 was
66,692.50 MU, the data revealed. The electricity generation in
January 2012 was 73,396 MU against a target of 73,377.66 MU,
whereas total generation in December 2011 stood at 72,717.69
MU against a target of 71,241.6 MU set for the month.
Of the total generation in February 2012, the thermal sector
accounted for 60,980.21 MU, while 2,702.30 MU was generated
by the nuclear sector. The hydro sector contributed 7,237.60
MU and Bhutan imports accounted for the remaining 68.37
MU. The target for generation in thermal sector for the month
was 59,922 MU, while that for the nuclear and hydro sectors
was 1,927 MU and 6,645.65 MU, respectively. The target for
Bhutan import was 48 MU.
In February 2011, the achieved figures of power generation
by various sectors stood at 55,749.25 MU for thermal, 2,653.80
MU for nuclear and 7,241.39 MU for the hydro sector. The
remaining 63.88 MU was contributed by Bhutan imports
during the month.
During the first eleven months (April-February) of 2011-12,
the Indian power utilities generated 797,268.41 MU whereas
the figure stood at 735,606.73 MU during the corresponding
period of the previous year.
Capacity addition
The power utilities in India added 972 MW of generation
capacity in February 2012 taking the total capacity addition
during the first eleven months of 2011-12 to 13,332.5 MW,
according to provisional data released by CEA.
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
All India PLF factor – February 2012 (in %)
0
Central State Sector Pvt. Utl. Sector All India
Program
Source: Cental Electricity Authority
Achivement
Categorywise energy generation
– February 2012 (in %)
4%
10%
Source: Cental Electricity Authority
0%
86%
Thermal Nuclear Hydro Bhutan Import
Capacity addition in February 2011 was 250 MW and that
during the first eleven months of 2010-11 was 11,654.5 MW, the
data revealed. In January 2012, total capacity addition stood
at 895 MW against a target of 2,245 MW. In December 2011,
capacity addition was 1,158 MW against a target of only 71 MW.
In February 2012, capacity added in the thermal sector was
972 MW while capacity addition in the hydro and nuclear
sectors both stood at nil. The capacity addition target was 250
MW for thermal sector, 132 MW for hydro and 1,000 MW for
nuclear sectors, the CEA data revealed.
In February 2011, capacity added in the thermal sector
stood at 250 MW against a target of 851 MW. Capacity added
in hydro and nuclear sectors both stood at nil, against targets
of 165 MW and nil, respectively.
Critical coal stock
Inadequate coal supplies by domestic coal companies and
lower imports by power utilities have led to critical coal stock
position at a number of Indian power plants.
According to data available with Coal Insights, a total of
34 plants of the total 89 in the country were faced with critical
coal stock position of less than seven days as on February 29.
The data further shows that out of the 34 plants facing ‘critical
coal stock’ position, 25 were facing ‘super critical’ coal stock
position of less than four days.
On February 15, out of the 37 plants facing critical coal stock
position of less than seven days, 30 were facing ‘super critical’
coal stock position of less than four days. Plants in Andhra
Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, Bihar and West Bengal were
the worst sufferers.
Plant load factor
The Plant Load Factor (PLF), a measure of the output of
COAL INSIGHTS 42 March 2012

fEATURE
Achievement vs target in capacity addition
(in MW)
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Thermal Hydro Nuclear
Target
Achievement
Source: Cental Electricity Authority
a power plant compared to the maximum output it could
produce, for the country for the month of February 2012 stood
at 78.47 percent against the planned 70.38 percent. The PLF
was 76.38 percent and 75.83 percent for January 2012 and
December 2011, respectively.
The PLF of power plants of central sector run companies
such as NTPC and DVC in February 2012 stood at 89.59
percent compared with 86.39 percent achieved in January
2012. The plants in the private sector recorded a PLF of 74.37
percent against the planned 67.03 percent.
The worst performer was GMDCL, which recorded a PLF
of 36.13 percent against a target of 72.41 percent. JSEB which
recorded a PLF of 8.99 percent against a target of 27.99 percent
continued to be a poor performer.
Power supply position
In the month of February 2012, the country’s peak power
demand was estimated at 78,067 MU, but actual availability
was only 69,430 MU, reflecting a shortfall of 8,637 MU or 11.1
percent.
Earlier, in the month of January 2012, the country’s peak
power demand was estimated at 81,061 MU, but actual
availability was only 73,498 MU, reflecting a shortfall of 7,563
MU or 9.3 percent.
An interesting observation is that despite overall
peak shortage of power in the country in February 2012,
Chandigarh, Lakshadweep, Andaman & Nicobar islands and
Sikkim did not have any peak power shortages, according to
data made available by CEA. Maharashtra, however, faced the
highest shortfall among all states during peak period with a
total shortfall of 2,199 MU.
Tamil Nadu recorded the second highest shortfall during
the month under review. The state recorded total shortfall of
1,609 MU in February 2012, against 942 MU in January 2012.
Madhya Pradesh continued to be a poor performer recording
a shortfall of 1,011 MU against 892 MU in January 2012. Uttar
Pradesh (854 MU versus 933 MU in January) also faced major
peak period shortfall during the month.
COAL INSIGHTS 43 March 2012

fEATURE
Power utilities’ coal import target for
FY’13 raised to 70 mt
Coal Insights Bureau
The Central Electricity Authority (CEA), a department
of Ministry of Power, responsible for keeping a watch
on various developments in the power sector, has
increased the coal import target of both imported as well as
indigenous coal based power utilities for the financial year
2012-13 to 70 million tons (mt) compared to the 2011-12 target
of 55 mt, a senior official of CEA told Coal Insights.
“The coal import target for indigenous coal based power
plants has been set at 46 mt for financial year 2012-13 while
the assessment for coal import by imported coal based power
plants is 24 mt,” the official said, adding that, “We do set
targets for indigenous coal based power plants, but only come
out with assessments for imported coal based plants.”
Asked whether the target of 46 mt import by indigenous
coal based power plants is feasible considering that fact that
the import by such plants in 2011-12 is likely to be only around
80 percent of the target of 35 mt, the official said, “We expect
that at least 40 mt of coal will be imported in 2012-13 by plants
designed to run on indigenous coal for blending purpose.”
“We have to set a higher import target for indigenous coal
based power plants as actual imports by them had traditionally
been lower than the target,” the official added.
“As far as imported coal based power plants are considered,
they too are expected to import around 85-90 percent of the
target,” he said.
According to information available with Coal Insights, the
indigenous coal based power plants had imported a total of around
22.94 mt coal between April 2011 and January 2012 against their
target of 29.17 mt whereas imported coal based power plants’ coal
import during the period stood at 15.8 mt against a target of 18 mt.
The total coal import by utilities stood at 40.6 mt, which was 80
percent of the target of 50.5 mt for the period.
S.
No.
Coal import target for indigenous coal based
power plants in 2012-13
Name of Power Plants
Target for
2012-13 (in
million tons)
Target for
2011-12 (in
million tons)
1 HPGCL 2.00 1.45
2 CLP 1.00 NA
3 RRVUNL 2.00 1.45
4 UPRVUNL 1.00 1.08
5 Reliance (Rosa) 0.90 0.30
6 Lanco (Anpara) 0.90 NA
7 CSEB 0.20 0.20
8 Torrent (AEC) 0.50 0.50
9 GSECL 1.50 1.48
10 MPPGCL 0.80 0.80
11 NTPC-SAIL Power Plant 0.40 0.30
12 Lanco (Pathadih) 0.40 NA
13 Mahagenco 3.50 3.35
14 RIL (Dahanu) 0.6 0 0.60
15 APGENCO 1.60 1.60
16 TNEB 2.00 1.80
17 KPCL 1.50 0.90
18 DVC 3.00 1.73
19 CESC 0.50 0.50
20 WBPDCL 1.00 1.00
21 NTPC -Indira Gandhi 1.00 0.30
22 NTPC 16.00 15.45
23 Bajaj Hindustan 0.30 NA
24 TVNL 0.20 NA
25 Vedanta (Sterlite) 1.00 NA
26 Vedanta (Balco) 0.30 NA
27 NTPC (JV) –Vellur 0.40 NA
28 Adani (Tiroda) 1.00 NA
29 Tata Power (Maithon) 0.50 0.21
Total (Indigenous Coal Based) 46.00 35.00
Total (Imported Coal based) 24.00 20.00
JSW Energy, Udupi TPP, Torangallu, Adani
Power, Mundra, Wardha Warora TPP,
Trombay etc)
Grand Total 70.00 55.00
COAL INSIGHTS 44 March 2012

fEATURE
India’s Jan cement production
up nearly 10.9%
Sanjukta Ganguly
With infrastructural sector showing an improvement
in demand, the cement sector in India has witnessed
an increase in production during the month of
January as compared to the previous month as well as the
same month a year ago. More investment in the infrastructural
sector is likely to give a boost to the cement industry in the
coming days, feel the industry experts.
Production scenario
India’s cement production by large plants, except ACC and
Ambuja Cement, in January 2012 moved up 10.99 percent
to 16.45 million tons (mt) compared to 14.82 mt in the
corresponding month of 2011, according to information made
available to ICMW by a member of the Cement Manufacturers’
Association (CMA).
The production in January 2012 was also 4.64 percent
higher compared with 15.72 mt in December 2011.
The production by ACC and Ambuja in January 2012 was
2.25 mt and 1.91 mt respectively and if their production is
taken into account, the total cement production of the country
would be 20.61 mt.
With this, the total production (except ACC and Ambuja)
during the first ten months (April-January) of 2011-12 stood
at 144.98 mt, up 5.7 percent from 137.16 mt during the same
period of 2010-11.
India’s clinker production by large plants, except ACC
and Ambuja Cement, in January 2012, stood at 12.35 mt, up
11.46 percent over 11.08 mt produced in the corresponding
month of the previous year. Clinker production in December
2011 stood at 11.96 mt. Clinker production of India during
the first ten months (April-January) of 2011-12 stood at 111.37
mt, up marginally by 2.04 percent from 109.14 mt during the
corresponding period of 2010-11.
Despatches
India’s cement despatches by large plants, except ACC and
Ambuja Cement, in January 2012 stood at 16.25 mt, up 10.32
percent as compared to 14.73 mt in the corresponding month
of 2011, according to information made available to ICMW by
a member of CMA. Total cement despatches in December 2011
stood at 15.76 mt, he said.
The despatches (except ACC and Ambuja) during the first
ten months (April-January) of 2011-12 stood at 143.94 mt, up
from 136.18 mt during the corresponding period of 2010-11.
Performance of cement majors
UltraTech Cement Ltd, an Aditya Birla Group company,
reported February cement production of 3.47 mt, down 8.2
percent compared with 3.78 mt produced in January. The
company’s production in February was, however, 4.96 percent
higher compared with 3.29 mt produced during the same
month of 2011.
The cement production during the first eleven months
(April-February) of 2011-12 stood at 35.73 mt against 34.68 mt
produced during the same period of 2010-11.
UltraTech’s cement despatches or sales in February stood at
3.52 mt, down 5.38 percent compared with 3.72 mt despatched
in January. The despatches in February were, however, 5.67
percent higher compared with 3.32 mt despatched in February
2011.
The cement despatches during the first eleven months
(April-February) of 2011-12 stood at 35.74 mt, up 3.2 percent
compared with 34.63 mt despatched during the corresponding
period of 2010-11.
Another leading cement maker, ACC Ltd’s cement
production dropped by 10.84 percent to 2.14 mt in February
2012 compared with 2.25 mt in January. However, the
production in February was up 8.63 percent as compared
with 1.97 mt produced in February 2011, the company said
in a release. The company’s despatches or sales in February
dropped by 3.59 percent and stood at 2.15 mt as compared to
2.23 mt in January. Cement despatches of ACC cement stood
at 2 mt in February 2011.
Ambuja Cement Ltd’s February production stood at 1.99
mt, up 4.19 percent as compared to 1.91 mt produced during
during the last month. In February 2011, production stood
at 1.79 mt. The company had sold 2 mt of cement during
February 2012 while during corresponding month of last year
the company’s cement despatch stood at 1.77 mt, Ambuja
Cements said in a statement.
Dec cement exports
India’s cement exports, except ACC and Ambuja Cement,
in January 2012 stood at 0.16 mt, up 14.29 percent from 0.14
mt during the corresponding month of 2010, according to
information made available to Coal Insights.
The exports during the first ten months (April-January) of
2011-12 stood at 1.38 mt, up 7.81 percent compared with 1.28
mt exported during the same period of 2010-11.
Meanwhile, exports of clinker in January 2012 fell by 14.29
percent to 0.18 mt from 0.21 mt in January 2011. The exports
during the first ten months of 2011-12 stood at 1.52 mt, down
31.22 percent from 2.21 mt during the corresponding period
of 2010-11.
COAL INSIGHTS 45 March 2012

Special Feature
Recovering carbon from flue gas
On the threshold of infinite energy
Coal Insights Bureau
Just how many times have you heard
these words – oil peak, coal peak,
or simply energy crisis How many
times have you cursed the consuming
class for the imminent shortage in
fossil fuels….and made that doomsday
prediction, ie the time when the world
will run out of fuel!
Strangely, there is no dearth of
energy around us. There is more energy
in nature than we can ever exhaust. In
other words, the energy crisis is not
about a shortage of energy. It’s only that
we are unable to tap it, except from a few
known sources, mainly fossil fuels. But
what if we could break that barrier….!
There is magic in nature. Everything
here comes in a cycle or a chain; eg.
life cycle, food chain, oxygen or water
cycle. Likewise there could be an energy
cycle too. The key to entering this cycle
could be the gateway to the mankind’s
search for an infinite source of energy,
affordable and non-polluting.
In the recently held Coal Asia 2012
COAL INSIGHTS 46 March 2012

Special Feature
conference in Delhi,
Dr Endre Simonyi, a
professor of chemical
sciences at Universitas
Budensis and the
Pázmány Péter
Catholic University in
Hungary, proposed
just as much.
Successful extraction
of carbon from flue
gas (discharged by
the thermal power
plants) can change the
Dr Endre Simonyi
way the world looks
at energy issues, he
suggested. It will not only provide a new source of fuel, but
will help cleanse the air as well. And yet, it’s not just simple
carbon capture and sequestration, but a step way forward.
Claiming that such a process can be successfully developed,
at least at the laboratory level, Dr Simonyi demonstrated
his experiment before a select audience that included the
representatives of India’s coal fraternity.
While the detail of the experiment, which is pending
patent and sponsors, was not to be shared with, the following
excerpts from his demonstration may give a broad hint to a
whole new world of possibilities!
The energy scenario
In the present global energy scenario, said Dr Simonyi, coal
fired power plants are the cheapest energy producers ($0.05
- 0.08/kwh), but they also produce the largest quantity of
greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. This poses a problem of
balancing power generation growth with environmental
sustainability.
The world’s biggest energy users can be found in the
northern temperate zone. The biggest amount of sunbeam
reaches the area of the equator, the northern parts of Africa,
India, the southern region of United States and China. To some
extent, the problem of a balance between power production
and environmental sustainability can be solved by producing
solar energy where there is sufficient sunbeam and then
transporting the same by tubes to places where it is needed
the most. But the costs of this method are humongous.
“Solar energy plants are the cleanest but their cost of
investment is very high (US $2,500 to 3,500/kw),” Dr Simonyi
said.
In the temperate zone, the annual dispersion of energy is
not adequate either. Most of the energy is needed in winter;
however the sunbeams are the least effective in that season. In
summer, the number of sunbeams is too much, while in winter
it is too few. The situation is the same at the above mentioned
energy producing areas too.
What is flue gas
Coal Insights Bureau
According to popular definition, flue gas is the gas
emitted into the atmosphere via a flue, which is a
pipe or channel for releasing exhaust gases from
a fireplace, oven, furnace, boiler or steam generator. In
many cases, the flue gas refers to the combustion exhaust
gas produced at power plants. The composition of flue
gas depends on what is being burned.
However, it usually consists of mostly nitrogen
(typically more than two-thirds or around 79 percent)
derived from the combustion air, carbon dioxide (CO2 –
8 to 14 percent) and water vapor as well as excess oxygen
(also derived from the combustion air; 2 to 6 percent). Flue
gas further contains a small percentage of a number of
pollutants, such as particulate matter, carbon monoxide,
nitrogen oxides, and sulphur oxides.
Flue gas scrubbing
At power plants, flue gas is generally treated with a series
of chemical processes and scrubbers, which help remove
pollutants. Electrostatic precipitators or fabric filters
remove particulate matter and flue-gas desulphurisation
captures the sulphur dioxide produced by burning fossil
fuels, particularly coal. Nitrogen oxides are treated
either by modifications to the combustion process to
prevent their formation, or by high temperature or
catalytic reaction with ammonia or urea. In either case,
the objective is to produce nitrogen gas, rather than
nitrogen oxides. In the US, there is a rapid deployment of
technologies to remove mercury from flue gas – typically
by adsorption on sorbents or by capture in inert solids
as part of the flue-gas desulphurisation product. Such
scrubbing can lead to meaningful recovery of sulphur for
further industrial use.
Technologies based on regenerative capture by
amines for the removal of CO 2
from flue gas have been
deployed to provide high purity gas to the food industry.
They are now under active research as a method for CO2
capture for long-term storage as a means of greenhouse
gas remediation.
There are a range of emerging technologies for
removing pollutants emitted from power plants. As
yet, there is very little performance data available from
large-scale industrial applications of such technologies,
and none has achieved significant penetration of the
enormous worldwide market.
Source: C Michael Hogan. 2011. Sulfur. Encyclopedia of Earth,
eds. A.Jorgensen and C J Cleveland, National Council for
Science and the environment, Washington DC
COAL INSIGHTS 47 March 2012

Special Feature
“There are reactions known for
reducing carbon-dioxide. Even
to methane. But there is no
such reaction known that goes
to coal and nowhere further.”
The real solution would be producing the energy in summer where
it is needed, and then storing it till winter. But there haven't been any
effective or profitable methods for doing this yet. There are only a few
methods for storing the energy for a few hours. With electrical energy
even this is impossible. “Electrical energy is the best form of energy for
the industry but storing big amounts through long times is insolvable
at a low price,” he observed.
A solution proposed
“If you ask one of your well-trained chemist acquaintances, whether
there is a chemical reaction that can, from the flue gas of coal-fired
power plants, produce coal in aqueous solution, without external
The major advantages of the new process could be as follows:
♦♦
It is feasible anywhere on the earth, and this really can’t be
told about too many energy supplying processes
♦♦
The only technology that not only doesn’t increase carbondioxide
emission, but actually decreases it
♦♦
The only technology that manufactures conventional,
high quality fossil fuel (and also valuable products such as
material for the production of car tires)
♦♦
The only technology that can terminate the carbon-dioxide
emission of the biggest carbon-dioxide emitter
♦♦
There is no security risk (Neither because of a natural disaster,
nor because of terrorism)
♦♦
It frees important countries from the dependence of energy
transports transported from risk-full countries
♦♦
It is a product that can be stored for unlimited time, securely
and with low costs
♦♦
It is a product that can be sent anywhere, without building
up an expensive infrastructure
energy, on atmospheric pressure and at room
temperature, the answer is going to be, there is no
such reaction,” said Dr Simonyi, “But attendees of
the Coal Asia 2012 saw this.”
The demonstration showed the professor
pouring his “magic” chemical into two test tubes,
one containing tap water and another soda water.
The chemical prepared when added to the solutions
took approximately 15 to 20 minutes to leave a
precipitation. This precipitated black substance is
claimed to be carbon or coal.
“Nowadays,” said Dr Simonyi, “scientists work
out hundreds of new reactions daily. So a new one
is not such a significant discovery. The oxidation
of coal is a highly exothermic process (the most
popular burn), its reversal is strongly endothermic.
So endothermic, that the thermal decomposition
of carbon-dioxide starts only over 2500°C. For this
reaction to still occur, a really strong reducing effect is
needed. But not too strong! There are reactions known
for reducing carbon-dioxide. Even to methane. But
there is no such reaction known that goes to coal and
nowhere further.”
Economic significance
The oil age, economists say, would not come to an
end due to depletion of all crude oil reserves, but
because such reserves will no longer be economical
to extract. Any new technology in energy field thus
must be commercially viable.
Talking about his discovery, Dr Simonyi said
the major advantage of this process could be its
economical viability and easy accessibility. “This
could be an essentially important sensation of basic
research, environment and economy,” he said.
As for countries like India, the new discovery can
help supplement the scarce energy sources. Although
India has abundant coal reserves, noted Dr Simonyi,
“Your coal mines don’t produce enough coal for your
power plants.”
One last word of caution – although the reduction
of carbon-dioxide is a vital part of the invention,
however, the regeneration of the “reduction agent”
without the cleansing of the coal wouldn’t be worth
anything. “We have the method for doing this too,”
he assured.
Dr Endre Simonyi has got two engineering diplomas (a chemical engineer – 1960, and a process control engineer – 1964, both from Budapest
University of Technology and Economics) and a PhD degree. He worked, among other places, at the Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy
of Sciences. Currently, he is lecturing at the Universitas Budensis and the Pázmány Péter Catholic University. His first patented innovation
was presented in 1964. In 2007, the inventor made as many patent applications as the biggest Hungarian university. Other than his pursuits
for new inventions, Dr Simonyi is associated with forensic sciences and with the Electrotechnical, Electronical and Infocommunicational
Department of the Budapest chamber of forensic experts since its formation (1994).
COAL INSIGHTS 48 March 2012

Technology
New biochemical syngas cleaning
mechanism
Coal Insights Bureau
Biodesulfurization is a technology which makes use
of a bio-chemical scrubber for the pre-cleaning of gas
streams such as biogas, sour natural gas, landfill gas,
unconventional gas streams such as syngas, Coal Bed Methane
(CBM), shale gas as well as vent gas, tail gas and acid gas
streams. Is the process economical Is the process efficient
During the recent Coal Asia 2012 Conference held in Delhi,
a presentation was made on “Biodesulfurization of H2S from
Syngas for Coal Gasification using the Bioskrubber TM Process”
by Chandan Gadgil, CEO of Innovative Environmental
Technologies, Pune, as a new technology for sulphur removal
from syngas.
Innovative Environmental Technologies Ltd offers
the Bioskrubber TM , an indigenous bio-chemical based,
economically attractive gas cleaning technology.
The Bioskrubber can be viewed as a caustic type of
Hydrogen Sulphide Removal System in which the spent
caustic solution is continuously regenerated in a bioreactor
using a biocatalyst.
The hydroxide containing scrubbing liquid is passed in a
counter-current flow with the H 2
S-containing gas during which
the gas is scrubbed from H 2
S up to 99 percent. The sulphidecontaining
scrubbing liquid is then directed to the bioreactor
where the sulphide is oxidized by aerobic microorganisms
into elemental biological sulphur and hydroxide used in the
scrubber is regenerated in this biological step. The marginal
bleed stream consisting of sodium salts is sulphide free and
can in most cases easily be discharged.
♦♦
Over 30 commercial plants successfully operating for the
last 15 years
♦♦
Operation at ambient temperature and pressure
♦♦
Bioskrubberhas an optimised design, suitable for
continuous operation without stoppage.
♦♦
No expensive catalysts and chemicals required
♦♦
Robust, reliable and time tested system suitable for varying
atmospheric temperatures.
♦♦
Low effluent generation by this H2S removal system.
♦♦
Biological sulfur called Sulfabact TM (patent pending) with
80-90 percent purity is co-produced, which is an excellent
natural sulfur nutrient for soil with a very high commercial
value.
Sulfabact TM
Sulfabact TM is biological sulfur recovered from the bioreactor
in the Bioskrubber TM system. Sulfabact TM has been proven as
a valuable soil nutrient with a very high commercial value.
Sulfur is the next important nutrient after N, P and K. The use
of sulfur results in higher yield, more greening, lesser use of
fungicides, pesticides and rodenticides. The lower pH caused
by use of sulfur results in the unlocking of nutrients originally
unavailable in alkaline soil. Sulfabact TM has advantages over
conventional S Soil nutrients as follows:
♦♦
Presence of Sulfur Oxidizing Bacteria(SOB): Sulfabact TM
contains SOB, due to which there is no dependence on soil
SOB for sulfur availability an in elemental sulfur
♦♦
No leaching: As the SOB in Sulfabact TM convert the sulfur
to sulfate in-situ, it does not get leached out by excessive
irrigation, rains and flooding as in sulfate fertilizers.
Advantages of Bioskrubber TM
♦♦
Bioskrubber TM uses a clean-technology process with a very
high H2S removal efficiency of over 99 percent.
♦♦
Low operating cost for our H2S removal system as
compared to other available gas scrubbing technologies as
up to 90 percent caustic recycled.
COAL INSIGHTS 49 March 2012

Technology
♦♦
Timely availability: As Sulfabact TM contains SOB; there is
immediate conversion to sulfate, available for plant uptake.
♦♦
Dispersive properties: Due to its colloidal size, the sulfur
particles in Sulfabact TM are dispersed evenly throughout
the soil layer and provide efficient supply of nutrient to
the soil.
♦♦
Optimum pH: Sulfabact TM is slightly acidic and provides
and optimum environment for soil SOB and hence
increases conversion efficiency
this cleaning technology could be used for coal/petcoke-based
syngas for following applications:
♦♦
Captive CHP plants based on gas turbines where H2S
needs to be removed;
♦♦
Captive power plants based on gas engines;
♦♦
Small-sized syngas plants on coal gasification for chemical/
fertiliser production;
♦♦
For coke oven gas cleaning.
The Bioskrubber TM plant can be made available on a
turnkey basis with a buyback on the sulfur produced.
Other applications of Bioskrubber TM
Gas cleaning for BioRenewables:
♦♦
Biogas Genset Based Power Generation: Generation of
electrical power from biogas is a more profitable option
as compared to its application as fuel in the boiler. Also,
electricity is easier to transport than steam or heat and
supply is easily measured. Biogas can be better employed
to generate power directly through Genset& the balance
heat can be further recovered as steam, hot water etc.
♦♦
Bio Methane: Biogas Upgradation technology removes
unwanted components of raw Biogas (H 2
S, CO 2
) and converts
it into BioMethaneTMi.e. upgraded biogas with enriched
methane content as in Compressed Natural Gas (CNG).
Innovative Environmental Technologies Pvt. Ltd works in
the field of gas cleaning which offers cutting edge technologies
through gas scrubbing ranging widely from bio gas cleaning
for renewable energy generation to the cleaning of gas obtained
from fossil fuel. Innovative offers gas scrubber systems for gas
cleaning from various streams such as sour natural gas, syngas,
acid gas, tail gas and other unconventional gas streams from
fossil fuels containing Hydrogen Sulphide to levels required
for various applications such as power generation, chemical
manufacture and transformation to liquid fuels. IETL is the
leading provider in India of innovative technologies and
sustainable end-to-end turnkey solutions for bio-gas cleaning
through its Bioskrubber for biogas based power generation.
"With over 30 projects successfully installed over more than a
decade, the Bioskrubberhas its presence at all of the major
biogas genset based power generation projects and some
natural gas based projects in India," as per Gadgil.
Application in coal sector
The Bioskrubber TM has been used very effectively for over 30
projects on H2S removal from biogas. This technology has
a good potential application for small to mid-sized projects
for syngas cleaning, where the other conventional sulphur
removal systems become unviable or too expensive. The range
at which this technology can be very attractive would be for a
sulphur removal capacity of up to 40 tons per day. Effectively,
Gas cleaning for unconventional gas streams/ fossil fuels
♦♦
Syngas/ Acid Gas/ Tail Gas/Process Gas Cleaning:
Innovative’s cleaning systems can be used for the cleaning
of gas streams such as sour natural gas, syngas, acid
gas, tail gas and other unconventional gas streams from
fossil fuels containing Hydrogen Sulphide such as power
generation, chemical manufacture and transformation to
liquid fuels.
For futher information please visit www.ietl.in or write to
chandangadgil@gmail.com
COAL INSIGHTS 50 March 2012

CORPORATE
JSPL Odisha coal gasification unit by July
Tamajit Pain
Jindal Steel & Power Ltd (JSPL), the flagship company of
the $10-billion OP Jindal Group, is all set to commence
operations at its coal gasification plant at Angul in Odisha
by July 2012, a top company official told Coal Insights.
“We expect the Angul project, the first of its kind in India,
to come on stream by June-July. The plant will have a capacity
of 80,000 barrels per day (bpd) equivalent of key oil products
(such as gasoline),” V.R. Sharma, deputy managing director
and CEO of JSPL, said.
Coal gasification is the process that converts coal
to synthesis gas by partial oxidation using oxygen and
superheated steam as the reactants. The synthesis gas mainly
consists of carbon monoxide, hydrogen and methane which
will be used as a reducing agent for the iron oxide to produce
DRI in the shaft furnace.
The company was earlier expected to commence operation
last year, but the work was delayed due to various reasons,
including gas pricing issues. Sharma noted that India has been
a rather slow-starter to this field of energy, but gradually “coal
gassification is becoming viable in this country.”
While being confident of the commercial success of the
Angul project, he said the company has planned to come up
with similar plants in future. Already, an amount of `50,000
crore has been earmarked for coal to liquid (CTL) projects and
the projects would come up by 2017, he added.
Investments
In order to expand its presence in steel, power and related
sectors, JSPL has earmarked more than `100,000 crore
investment in steel, power and coal to liquids projects,
company sources said. This investment would come in phases
in the next eight years, they said.
A total amount of `45,000 crore has been earmarked for
expansion in the steel sector, the sources said, adding that
about `15,000 crore has been already invested till date. An
amount of `50,000 crore has been earmarked for coal to liquid
projects and the projects would come up by 2017, he said. The
company has also earmarked `35,000 crore for power sector.
Of this `10,000 crore has already been invested.
Apart from this the company is planning to come up with
a 4,000-MW hydro power plant in Arunachal Pradesh subject
to government support. The total investment for the hydro
power project is `24,000 crore.
“We are working closely with the state government.
The MoU has been signed and the rehabilitation work has
started. We intend to start the project work in near future,”
the official said. However, the company is still waiting for the
final go ahead from the central government and its assurance
regarding security matters.
Commenting on the project, a power industry source said,
“There is huge hydro power potential in the northeastern
state, estimated at around 50,000 MW. A number of private
sector companies, including JSPL and Reliance, have evinced
interest in this sector. However, these projects will need active
support of the governments. There are security issues and
only government can dispel such concerns.”
Net profit
Meanwhile, JSPL is expecting to achieve 30 percent growth in
net profit in 2011-12 at `3,000 crore, Sharma said.
Asked about the revenue growth, he said the company
expects to clock revenues of around `15,000 crore during the
current year. The topline growth was around 25 percent in the
nine month period ended December 2011.
Earlier, on January 19, the company had reported a 6.6
percent increase in third-quarter group profit aided by a onetime
gain and higher demand. Net profit rose to `997 crore in
the three months ended December 31 from `935 crore a year
earlier.
Total expenses, including raw material costs, for the
quarter jumped 58 percent to `295 crore, the company said.
Jindal Steel made an exceptional gain of `25.94 crore in the
period.
Jindal Steel plans to build a 5 million-ton steel plant and
two power plants in Jharkhand. The company, scouting for
coal assets overseas to meet requirements for its blast furnace
and power plants, will start output at its mine in Mozambique
this year.
JSPL’s integrated steel plant
COAL INSIGHTS 51 March 2012

CORPORATE
RCF, CIL JV to set up coal gasification
unit at Talcher
Coal Insights Bureau
Srikant Jena, Union Minister of State for Chemicals and Fertilisers
Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd (RCF) have
joined hands with Coal India Ltd (CIL) to jointly come
up with a coal gasification project at Talcher in Angul
district of Odisha.
RCF is in the process of setting up the coal based gasification
project in Talcher and CIL will be the equal partner for this
project, according to company officials.
The two companies have decided to float a special purpose
vehicle (SPV) for the project, which will be completed by the
next couple of years. Gail, another public sector unit, may join
hands but will not hold any stake.
The overall investment requirement has been estimated
at Rs 8,000 crore, including Rs 3,000 crore for upstream and
the remaining Rs 5,000 crore for downstream sectors. The
proposed plant will have the capacity to produce 2,500 tons
per day of ammonia and 3,500 tons per day of urea, the final
product. The closed Talcher plant belonged to Fertiliser
Corporation of India Ltd (FCIL) and RCF and Coal India will
pump in the investments to revive the closed unit.
According to the sources, the Ministry of Chemicals and
Fertilisers has sent a revival proposal of the plant to the Board
of Industrial and Finance Reconstruction (BIFR), which is
expected to get approved. The global tender will be invited
once the revival proposal is approved by the BIFR, sources said.
It may be noted here that Odisha Chief Minister Naveen
Patnaik had called for the Prime Minister’s intervention to
revive the Talcher fertiliser plant. Production of urea and
ammonia has been suspended in the plant from April 1, 1999
due to non-viability of economic operations, according to the
FCIL.
The Odisha government has agreed to provide all support
for the revival of the plant as the state which accords the
highest priority to agriculture is experiencing urea shortage
frequently and the demand supply gap for urea has widened
over the years.
Further, this plant can build synergy with the Petroleum,
Chemicals and Petrochemical Investment Region (PCPIR)
which the government of Odisha is developing with the
support of the central government.
Meanwhile, RCF is set to sign a fuel supply agreement
(FSA) with Coal India Ltd (CIL) for the plant, a senior company
official told Coal Insights.
As per the plant requirement, RCF will sign a FSA for
supply of 5.5 million tons per annum (mtpa) of E/F grade coal
for the next 20 years, the official said. The coal to be supplied
should preferably be washed to the level of 35 percent ash
content.
Meanwhile, according to RCF, the current urea production
in the country is 220 lakh tons per annum and import of urea
is 80 lakh tons per annum. By the end of the Twelfth Plan, the
consumption of urea will be approximately around 330 lakh
tons per annum.
Similarly, the current complex and DAP indigenous
production is 125 lakh tons per annum and import is around
85 lakh tons per annum. By the end of the Twelfth Plan the
total consumption of the above would be approximately 235
lakh tons per annum. To meet this demand of fertilisers, the
most vital input required is ammonia.
Ammonia can be produced through these routes:
♦♦
Natural gas/naphtha
♦♦
Fuel oil/LSHS
♦♦
Coal gasification
Energy consumption for ammonia production
(2500 TPD Ammonia)
Sl. No. Feed Syngas Process Route
Energy,
Gcal/MT
Relative
Factor
1 N.G Reforming 7.0 1.0
2 Naphtha Reforming 7.7 1.1
3 Fuel Oil Partial Oxidation 8.05 1.15
4 Coal FBDB Gasification 10.0 1.45
COAL INSIGHTS 52 March 2012

CORPORATE
Due to limited availability of feedstock gas, high price of
gas and consequent marginal viability no major projects have
fructified. The gas production projections from KG Basin are
also not very encouraging.
Although EGoM has decided that feedstock gas
requirement will be met once the
plant is set up, however, no major plants have come up
in last 10 years. Further volatility of gas prices and future
projections of $14 to $18 per mmBtu is a big retardant. All this
leads to sourcing of feedstock from alternate sources like coal.
India has large reserves of coal – 246 billion tons as
compared to 728 million tons of crude oil and 686 billion cubic
meters of natural gas.
Moreover, coal meets 60 percent of commercial energy
needs and 70 percent of power is produced through coal based
thermal power stations. Also, coal gasification plants are
successfully operating in countries like South Africa, China,
USA, Netherlands etc. due to cost competitiveness with that
of natural gas feedstock. In China, 70 percent of ammonia
production is through coal gasification. Cost of production of
ammonia through this route is less by around 20 to 30 percent
compared to natural gas.
The coal gasification technologies used are:
♦♦
Fixed bed – Lurgi;
♦♦
Fluidised bed –Winkler; and
♦♦
Entrained flow – Shell, Texaco, Kopper-Totzek.
In the wake of shortage of urea in the country, the
government has planned to revive five closed fertiliser units.
A study was carried out for setting up fertiliser unit through
coal gasification. The findings showed good viability and the
units at Talcher, Ramagundam, Sindri and Durgapur are near
to coal mines and pit heads. This is an advantage if coal based
technology is chosen.
There are challenges for coal gasification in India like
handling of huge quantities of ash, environmental issues, cost
competitiveness with respect to capital cost and operating cost
and reliability. But solutions are also there like coal gasification
technology suppliers are ready to undertake ammonia-urea
project on Build Own & Operate (BOO) basis and this will
reduce capital investment by the owner and transfer risk to
BOO agency.
The environmental issues of very low fly ash and bottom
ash in the form of solidified slag can be solved with solutions
like washing/blending for tackling problems related to high
ash content.
Thus, in view of gas price volatility, it is better to have
deterministic price of feedstock. This can be done in the case
of indigenous coal. This shows that coal gasification has a
promising future in the Indian fertiliser industry as new and
reliable technologies have developed suitable to high ash
content coal. Thus, considering the large reserves of coal,
India must explore the coal gasification route for production
of fertilisers as well as chemicals
COAL INSIGHTS 53 March 2012

CORPORATE
BKT plans 32% hike
in production
Coal Insights Bureau
Tyre maker BKT, a leader in the segment of off highway
tyres, has set aggressive plans for the year 2012.
The company is targeting to increase production by
32 percent. This would include the continuously upgraded
capacities from its three existing plants as well as partial
contribution from the Bhuj plant.
It is also targeting that the new Bhuj plant will contribute
around 20 percent of the total production for 2012. With the help
COAL INSIGHTS 54 March 2012

CORPORATE
With an objective of 35 percent year on year growth, BKT is
continuing its momentum for the next decade. In 2011, despite
the various capacity constraints, BKT has achieved an increase
of 20 percent in terms of output tonnage. The company plans
to close the financial year 2011-12 with a sales volume growth
of 40 percent.
At a time when the Indian miners lament the dearth of
local-made heavy mining machineries, Mumbai-based BKT is
rolling out an ambitious plan to emerge as a global leader in the
off-highway tyre segment. BKT is part of the well-diversified
Indian conglomerate Siyaram-Poddar Group having presence
in textiles, garments, chemicals, paper and tyres with sales in
excess of $800 million.
Founded by Dharaprasad Poddar, the current group
chairman, and late Mahabirprasad Poddar, the founder
chairman, the group began its operations as textile trading
house, in 1951 and grew steadily by diversifying into other
business sectors.
The group ventured into tyres in the year 1988 by setting
up Balkrishna Tyres (BKT), manufacturing two-three wheeler
tyres. However, the real success story of BKT began in 1995,
when it ventured into production of off-highway tyres. With
complete focus on intensive market research, in-depth product
knowledge and excellent product development capabilities,
BKT has already made its mark in the off-highway tyres
segment and is continuously evolving to achieve a greater
footprint in this niche segment.
Today, the tyre segment contributes more than half of
overall Group turnover, with a global sales of `2,200 crore
(around $415 million). The segmental revenue is expected to
grow up to `2,800 crore in 2011-12 (around $528 million). By
2014, BKT aims to increase the global tyre business turnover
to $1 billion.
The company’s mid-term goal is to emerge as a global
leader in off-highway tyre solutions market. For this the
company needs to garner 10 percent market share by 2014
(current share is around 3 percent). In order to do that, the
company will maintain its superior quality off-highway
tyres, backed by advanced technology and rigorous quality
control for complete customer satisfaction, as per company
information.
of the work done by the project team, the company plans to prepone
commercial production coming out of the Bhuj plant by
at least a quarter, to the second quarter of the current calendar.
By 2014, BKT is aiming to emerge as a global leader,
garnering 10 percent share in the global off-highway tyre
market. This, according to managing director Arvind Poddar,
will be helped by India’s largest and most modern off-highway
tyre plant that BKT is setting up at Bhuj in Gujarat.
Plant expansion
Currently, BKT has three state-of-the-art tyre manufacturing
units located in northern and western provinces of India.
Two of these units are in Rajasthan and the remaining in
Maharashtra. A fourth tyre manufacturing plant is coming up
at Bhuj in the western state of Gujarat, very near to the port of
Mundra.
While most of the machinery for the new tyre plant at Bhuj
is already in the commissioning mode, a part of the plant has
already started “tube production” from December onwards.
With the full range of tubes going to be available for various
COAL INSIGHTS 55 March 2012

CORPORATE
BKT’s R&D capabilities
♦♦
Resources and infrastructure
♦♦
Dedicated team of engineers for R&D
♦♦
Dedicated team of engineers for Technical support &
Quality Control
♦♦
Complete testing equipment for compound
development
♦♦
3D Modeling & EDM Process for tyres and moulds
♦♦
Controlled Laboratory tests
♦♦
Highly efficient product testing machines
♦♦
Tie-ups for outdoor testing facilities
off highway tyres, this would serve the regular needs of the
distribution partners.
All plants put together, the company will produce a vast
range of around 1,900 SKUS (Stock Keeping Units), company
insiders informed.
The machines are modern, efficiently producing tyres as
per international standards and satisfying the varied needs of
the consumers. From efficient compound mixing machines to
the best in class curing presses, to the high cost and renowned
tyre building machines, BKT plants are fully equipped with
the most modern machinery and are very well maintained to
get the optimum output in terms of quality and quantity, they
added.
BKT tyres can effectively handle multiple mould changes
and manage more than 40 compounds everyday. Consistency
in tyre quality is the result of more than 450 checks, which
every tyre in the manufacturing process goes through.
BKT’s unique off-highway tyres include:
♦♦
Agricultural tyres (Cross ply & Radial)
♦♦
Industrial and Construction tyres (Cross ply &
Radial)
♦♦
OTR Tyres (Cross ply & Radial)
♦♦
Other special application tyres :
♦♦
Turf tyres,
♦♦
ATV
♦♦
Golf
♦♦
Go Cart tyres
♦ ♦ Military tyres (puncture resistant and run flat)
The major highlight of BKT’s product range is
the width and depth of its product range, showing
the magnitude as well as diversity:
♦♦
Small go-kart tyres to gigantic earthmover tyres.
♦♦
Tyres for rim size from smallest 5” up to largest
54”.
♦♦
Tyres weighing from 1.7 kg to 1700 kg.
♦♦
Conventional cross ply tyres to most modern
polyester radials, all steel OTR radial, aramide
belted (puncture proof) and run flat military
application tyres.
♦♦
Tyres for varied applications from conventional
farming to modern and high technology oriented
agriculture. From effortless implements to
complex GPRS controlled tractors.
♦♦
Tractor tyres specially designed to carry higher
loads at a higher speed on roads and with
minimal soil compaction in field.
♦♦
Mega sizes radial tyres for tractors having over
250 HP engine capabilities.
♦♦
Scientifically designed and engineered tyres for
tankers and wagons.
♦♦
Tyres for construction, material handling, port
applications, mining (underground as well as
open cast mines).
♦♦
Tyre for golf carts used at golf courses and
passenger transport at airports.
♦♦
Tyres for ATV/Quads - from utility to high
performance racing tyres. Also available,
E-marked ATV tyres for usage on European
roads.
COAL INSIGHTS 56 March 2012

CORPORATE
Spurred by high demand, the fourth plant at Bhuj will
practically double the capacity and facilitate in reducing the
tyre lead times. The new plant would be a greenfield project,
with ultramodern facilities having advanced technology
equipment.
Mould plant
BKT’s mould plant near suburban Mumbai in western India
offers great flexibility in having faster turnaround times – from
the concept to tyre availability in the market. The best-in-class
machinery and the 3-D modeling systems offer greater control
on the mould/tyre dimensions, as per information from the
company.
The mould plant with almost double capacity to produce
high quality moulds with state-of-the-art machines was
inaugurated in October at Dombivilli near Mumbai. This
would be of great importance for rolling tyres from the new
Bhuj plant, since timely mould availability is a major step in
the process.
Markets & exports
A testimony to BKT’s consistency in offering high-quality
specialty tyres is amply demonstrated by the fact that 95
percent of its products are consumed by the overseas markets,
of which over 50 percent is sold in technologically advanced
Europe. Other major markets for BKT are North America and
the Middle East, followed by South America, Africa, Australia
and Asia.
With its total dedication to the specialty tyre segment,
BKT has also emerged globally as the preferred supplier to
major OEMs in construction, agricultural and industrial tyre
segments. BKT has established offices in Italy and the US
(Ohio Akron) to look after the overseas operations.
Milestones @ BKT
“Today, BKT has presence in more than 120 countries
across the globe and has the privilege of being the largest tyre
exporter out of India,” Poddar said.
Apart from catering to the Indian OEMs, BKT has been
a preferred supplier on a global basis to leading OEMs in
the agricultural and industrial/construction equipment
sectors.
In India, the company is present in the OTR segment,
mining, infrastructure, material handling and OEMs.
However, the agri tyre segment is not in its current focus in
India.
Quality control
Quality control is stringently carried out at every stage of
manufacturing – starting from the raw material to the finished
COAL INSIGHTS 57 March 2012

CORPORATE
product ensuring a product of a consistently
high quality. State-of-the-art manufacturing
tools run by experienced operators allow
BKT to manufacture tyres of outstanding
quality efficiently and cost effectively. All
BKT plants are ISO 9000 and IS0 14000
certified and that reflects in the plant
efficiency.
In order to ensure high standard of
quality, BKT has set up a sophisticated test
centre with modern equipment, including
those that are used for endurance-testing.
Besides in-house testing, BKT regularly
conducts tests under international
regulations outside India as well.
R&D and technology
BKT’s R&D centre, set up in plant
locations, is capable of developing various
types of rubber compounds required for
manufacturing tyres for varied applications.
BKT is also associated with European
testing facilities to ensure that its products
perform to demanding stringent applications.
Eco-friendly approach
BKT has consistently made efforts to reduce its carbon footprint
and uphold its strongest belief – “Environment protection
at all costs”. The company is committed to social causes as
well as to protecting the environment. A large part of BKT’s
energy requirement is fulfilled through non-conventional and
renewable energy sources, where BKT has invested rationally,
a senior company official informed.
BKT strongly believes in “Green
World” cause and ensures
environment friendly steps at all
plants. The following bear out
its dedication to the cause:
♦♦
All the three
plants’ outputs are in
compliance with European
Directive “REACH”, as of
November 2009.
♦ ♦ ‘Green Power’
is generated through the
windmill established by
BKT in the northern state of
Rajasthan.
♦♦
E n e r g y
conservation is on the top
of the agenda, with a belief
that “power saved is power
generated”.
New product development & branding
According to Poddar, BKT has always been in the forefront to
adopt new generation technologies in tyre manufacturing as
well as on the raw material front.
It has been proactive in tandem with its equipment suppliers
to modify the equipment, making them best-suited for
production. Equipment is selected from the best available
source.
Similarly, all the raw materials at BKT are sourced from
top quality suppliers with whom BKT has enjoyed an excellent
relationship for many years. This ensures a continuous supply
with consistent quality.
With regard to new product development, BKT develops
150-160 new SKUs every year. This continuous development
is the basis for the vast product range available from BKT, and
offers a wide range to choose from.
“Another unique feature of BKT’s product range is variety,”
said Poddar. “BKT has tyres available from the smallest 5” Go-
Kart tyres to the largest 51” Mining tyres and thus catering to
the diversified market segments,” he said.
As for branding the products, consistent efforts over the
years have resulted in creating a strong awareness of BKT.
Today brand BKT has emerged as a symbol of trust, excellence
and genuineness as shown in its prior tag line: “CONFIDENCE
REINFORCED!”
“Growing together is our new tagline, strengthening
the new corporate identity at every stage. BKT is firmly
committed to this aim of being perceived as a company
where people and machines share a strong professional
fellowship,” Poddar said.
COAL INSIGHTS 58 March 2012

expert speak
Allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL
companies a national blunder
J.P. Panda
In this issue, we will examine
whether it was a good idea to
have allocated coal blocks to
companies other than CIL.
In order to do that, we first
need to take a close look at the
overall energy scenario in India,
where 70 percent of the electricity
is produced from coal and thus
evidently coal has a huge role in
the energy security of India. Out of
the total 771,173 million units of power, 539,251 million units
are being produced from coal.
The country’s demand for coal for the year 2011-12 is
713.24 million tons (mt) but the production is likely to stand at
only 629.91 mt or less and therefore the shortfall will be 83.33
mt or more, which has to be imported. Can India achieve even
this modest target of 629.91 mt, is the question.
The shortfall in coal supply may touch 269 mtby 2021-22,
from the current level of around 80 mt as domestic producers
fail to keep up with the growing demand for the commodity.
The demand for coal in 2021-22 is projected to be around 1,353
mt against the production assessment of 1084 mt, resulting in
a shortfall of 269 mt, the coal minister, Sriprakash Jaiswal, said
recently.
The issue here is that the huge quantum of import that the
country will have to depend on. The cost of importing nearly
270 mt of coal will be around `1.08 lakh crore at a rate of
nearly `4,000 per ton or more. To handle such large quantity
of import, India has to build port, rail and road infrastructure,
which may cost another `10 lakh crore. Potentially this could
cripple India’s economy.
Captive blocks allocation
When the demand of coal in the country outpaced the growth
capabilities of CIL (including SCCL), the Ministry of Coal
took a policy decision in 1993 to allocate coal blocks to non-
CIL companies, both in the private and public sectors, for
developing coal projects for “captive use” of coal in power,
steel and cement sectors. This decision was welcomed for
sustaining the economic growth of the country, particularly
for the growth of the energy sector.
There were certain factors which had prompted the
government to take this decision. In spite of the spectacular
growth of the coal sector after nationalisation of the coalmines
of the country in 1972-73, later CIL and its subsidiary
companies were not able to cope with the ever increasing
demand-supply gap in coal requirement of the country,
particularly in the energy sector. In the present era of global
competition, it was not desirable that the country should
continue to encourage government monopoly in the coal
sector by relying on one government company, CIL, for its
entire indigenous coal requirement. India is bestowed with a
huge reserve of 285 billion tons of coal (latest figure by GSI)
and multiple agencies, both in the public and private sectors,
should be given the scope to develop the huge coal reserves to
meet the increased requirement of coal.
In an assessment by the Planning Commission, the
requirement of coal by the terminal year of the Twelfth Plan
period (i.e. in 2016-17) would be 1,125 million tons (mt).
The indigenous production of coal in the country is now
stagnating at the level of 550 mt per year. Hence, the decision
of the Ministry of Coal to allocate coal blocks to non-CIL
companies was definitely a timely step in the right direction.
It has already allocated 213 coal blocks, with a total reserve of
49,641 mt of coal, to various non-CIL companies both in the
public and private sectors.
Current status of blocks
Although more than 15 years have passed since the coal
ministry started allocating coal blocks in 1994, only 28 blocks
which are located near already existing infrastructural facilities
for rail-road connectivity, have come to production stage,
giving a total production of only 35 mt of coal in 2010-11. From
this poor progress in development of the allocated coal blocks,
it is evident that the very objective of overall increase in the
coal production capacity of the country has not been achieved
up to the desired level so far.
There are some serious problems now being faced by CIL
companies and also by non-CIL companies in the development
of new coal blocks. They are the rigid, unhelpful and noncooperative
attitude of the MoEF in granting “statutory
clearances” for the new coal projects. The controversy of “Go”
and “no-go” areas has also resulted in abnormal delay.
Coal is our main source of energy and our coal requirement
by 2030 is likely to be nearly 2,500 mt or more. And with the
present production level of 550 mt, India has a long way to go
as 90 percent of all future projects are facing forest clearance
problems. The ministry has to take a decision regarding “go”
and “no-go” projects. The coal occurrence is site specific and
COAL INSIGHTS 59 March 2012

Expert Speak
most of it is under forest cover. Do we stop mining altogether
or do we start a fresh initiative of dynamic afforestation is
something that has to be decided.
Advance dynamic afforestaion has to be done in barren
areas to compensate for the coal bearing area loss of forest.
In other words, we have to create forests in barren areas as
a compensatory measure to replenish the depleted forest
cover. It may be noted that it takes 40 years to create a forest
but coal seams occur only in trillions of years and are site
specific.
The recent spate of unrest in different parts of India about
land acquisition has resulted in abnormal delay in land
procurement. The demand for employment has been most
important demand of land losers which has not been fulfilled
by the coal block allocates.
Apart from these major issues, there are other problems as
well, all of them equally important. The first among them is
poor or no infrastructure. No integrated and comprehensive
planning has been done for development of coal blocks in
the greenfield areas of the coalfields. Before 1994, when the
ministry of coal started allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL
companies, all coal projects in the country used to be planned
and developed by only one government agency, CIL, except of
course, some coalmines of SCCL and a few captive coalmines of
TISCO, IISCO etc. Normally, subsidiary coal companies of CIL
prepare their plans to develop the coal blocks in contiguous
groups or clusters, the new coal blocks being adjacent to the
already existing and working ones. This process of “sequential
mining” of the coal blocks helps the coal companies of CIL
to plan and develop new coal blocks by partially utilising
the existing infrastructural facilities of the adjacent working
coal projects and subsequently extending the additional
infrastructural facilities to the new coal blocks.
For operational convenience of the coal projects of CIL
companies, a conscious and correct decision had been taken
by the ministry of coal to allocate new and virgin coal
blocks to non-CIL companies, geographically away from
the area of operation of CIL companies. As a result, almost
all the allocated coal blocks are located in greenfield areas,
where no infrastructural facilities, not even any rail-road
connectivity, exist for development of new coal blocks.
As the coal blocks allocated to non-CIL companies are not
within the area of operation of CIL, naturally such coalblocks
are not covered within the ambit of future planning
by CIL or CMPDI.
Without advanced, comprehensive and macro-level
planning, it is not at all possible to develop the coal blocks
allocated to a large number of independent companies in
greenfield areas. Only a few of the allocated blocks, which
are located near existing infrastructural facilities, with railroad
connectivity, can be developed for production. But
the majority of them cannot be brought to production stage
without any comprehensive and macro-level planning for the
greenfield areas of the coalfields.
The second problem is that of fragmentation of the
coal reserves into small and medium size coal blocks and
allocation of the fragmented coal blocks to a large number of
independent companies.
The objective behind the decision of allocation of coal
blocks to non-CIL companies was not to create a handful
favoured industrial units (power plants, sponge iron/steel
plants and cement plants) by allocating them coal blocks
and ensuring their coal-availability at a much less cost in
comparison to their majority counterparts who do not have
coal blocks. The objective of allocation of coal blocks to non-
CIL companies was to substantially increase the overall coal
production capacity in the country. This objective could have
been achieved more effectively if large chunks of coal reserves
in greenfield areas (say, at least 5,000 to 10,000 mt) would have
been allocated to non-CIL companies both in the private and
public sectors, with proven records of capability for long-term
planning and investment. Such allocate-companies could
have produced coal from high-capacity coal projects (25 to 50
mtpa capacity) to be developed from the allocated coal blocks
and ensured coal supplies to the coal- consuming industrial
units as per the guidelines and coal distribution policies of the
ministry of coal, in the same way as the coal companies of CIL
are now producing and supplying coal in the country. This
system of allocation could not have created groups of coalconsuming
industrial units; one small “favoured” group with
allocated coal blocks and the other majority group without
any coal blocks allocated to them. In that case, all the major
coal-consuming industrial units in the country could operate
on a “level-playing field”.
But, in order to satisfy a higher number of applicant
companies, the coal reserves in a coalfield were fragmented
into small and medium size coal blocks and allocated to a large
number of companies, both in the private and public sectors.
These small & medium size coal-blocks are not suitable for
planning modern, high-capacity coal-projects.
There are possibilities of greater loss of coal reserves in
such small-size coal blocks. The reason is that sub-dividing
them into small blocks, results in mining loss of around 30-
40 percent of the reserves due to coal loss in barriers, safety
zone and maintaining angle of repose etc. Can India afford
to lose such a huge resource of nearly 40 percent due to
mining loss
The allocattee companies of these small and medium size
coal blocks do not have the professional competence and
capacity for long-term planning and investment for the coal
projects.
Their basic objective and priority are to run their existing
plants (i.e. sponge iron plants and associated captive power
plants, cement plants etc). It is quite likely that such coal block
allocattees would indulge in “selective mining”, without any
concern for conservation of the “difficult-to- mine” coal-seams
or deep-seated coal-seams.
Another factor is the lack of adequate exploration
COAL INSIGHTS 60 March 2012

Expert Speak
capacity in the country. In order to satisfy more number of
applicantcompanies, the ministry of coal has allocated many
coalblocks without detailed geological exploration.
The available capacity in the country for undertaking
detailed exploration of the coal reserves is highly inadequate.
Knowing this well, the ministry of coal should have taken
steps to engage suitable international agencies to undertake
detailed exploration of the country’s geological reserves, in
collaboration with G.S.I., CMPDI and MEC etc. But, in order
to satisfy more number of applicants, the ministry allocated
many unexplored coal blocks in haste, even without detailed
exploration.
Now, for detailed exploration of the allocated coal
blocks, the individual allocattee companies are compelled to
engage some “agencies”, whose credibility and reliability for
undertaking such highly technical assignments are doubtful.
It is neither practicable nor economically viable for the
individual allocattee companies to engage suitable outside
international agencies for undertaking detailed exploration of
individual coal-blocks.
Allocation of coal blocks to a large number of smaller
companies and lack of any platform or forum for bringing
them together under one umbrella is also a huge problem.
The coal companies of CIL undertake construction of
infrastructural facilities, which are common for a group of
adjacent coal blocks viz. railway siding, approach road, water
supply system, electricity supply, residential colony etc. They
have to make heavy investments for planned development of
the required infrastructural facilities.
But, except a few, the majority of the allocattee companies
are small companies both in the private and public sectors,
who do not have either the competence or the capability
to develop the required infrastructural facilities for the
coal projects. These allocattee companies are independent
companies with diverse objectives and diverse priorities.
It is neither practicable nor commercially viable for each of
them to independently make investments for constructing the
required infrastructural facilities (viz. rail-connectivity from
the main-line of Indian rail network up to their allocated coal
block.
Left to themselves, these companies cannot develop any
common forum or syndicate for planning and executing
common infrastructural facilities, which can serve a group of
coal-blocks.
The ministry of coal, which is the Administrative Wing of
the Central government for the coal sector of the country, does
not consider it its obligation to ensure that some institution or
some mechanism is developed to bring together these small
and medium allocattee companies for planning and execution
of the required common infrastructural facilities.
The coal ministry, instead of analysing the ground realities
responsible for such abnormal delay in development of the
allocated coal-blocks and instead of taking necessary corrective
measures, simply conducts occasional review meetings
and threatens the allocattee companies with cancelling the
allocations for delay in achieving the so-called “milestones” of
development of the coal projects.
Conclusion
Before 1972-1973, before nationalisation of the coalmines in
the country, most of the coal mines in India except a few of
the then government company N.C.D.C., were in the hands
of small private sector companies. Most of these coal-mineowners
were indulging in so-called “rat-hole” mining, with
scant regard for safety in mines, conservation of coal, scientific
development of the coal reserves, long-term planning and
investment for growth of coal industry in the country or
welfare of the labour-force engaged in coal mines.
The country had taken a bold step in nationalising the coal
mines in 1972 and 1973, as a result of which the coal industry
of the country was revamped and the coal production capacity
of the country could increased substantially, by long-term
planning, investment and scientific development of coal
reserves.
But the manner in which the coal ministry has allocated
the coal blocks 1994 onwards, with the sole objective
of satisfying more number of applicants, without any
comprehensive planning, the benefits of nationalisation
are likely to be negated. The very objective of substantial
increase in coal production cannot be achieved simply due
the faulty manner of allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL
companies.
For example, the Talcher Coalfields is one of the ideal
locations for mega projects. The coalfield covers an area of
1860 sq km with coal bearing area of 1000 sq km, is almost
rectangular shaped measuring 80 km along the strike and
26 km along the dip. The coal occurs in the Karharbari and
Barakar formations in seams from I, II, III, VIII and IX seams,
many of which are all thick seams with large scale opencast
prospects.
The coalfield is mostly located in the Angul district of
Orissa. This is the biggest coalfield in India with most of the
coal available in shallow depth and quarriable. The present
production is being utilised by NALCO, APGENCO, TNEB,
NTPC and Karnataka Electricity Board for power generation.
The production programme envisaged for the coalfield by
CMPDIL is 90.97 mt in 2011-12, 237.32 mt for 2016-17 and 348.88
mt for 2016-17. But how will such an ambitious production
programme be achieved unless the whole infrastructure of
evacuation is built up
Can the Railways, presently carrying approximately 400
mt for the whole country, increase its infrastructure within 10
years so as to carry nearly 350mt of coal from a single coalfield
to long distance destinations like Andhra Pradesh, Tamil
Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat
Who will build the infrastructure for all the small and
medium coal blocks which has been allocated by the ministry
All indications point to the fact that even if coal is produced
COAL INSIGHTS 61 March 2012

Expert Speak
within 2-3 years time, it cannot be evacuated. It is indeed a sad
commentary for this country’s infrastructure.
Without building infrastructure in advance, it appears that
the allocation of coal blocks to non-CIL companies is a national
blunder. What corrective steps can be taken now at this stage
Some suggestions
Detailed exploration of the unexplored coal reserves of the
country should be undertaken by the Central government by
engaging reputed international exploration agencies under
the guidance of GSI and CMPDI.
Integrated Comprehensive Master Plans should be
prepared for each coalfield, particularly for all the major
coalfields in the country. In this endeavor, CMPDI, as the
nodal planning agency of the country, should also associate
world-class planners and developers of coal projects available
in other advanced countries. Mega project planning should
include infrastructure planning of the whole coalfield/
coal basin or the mega coal mine, involving the Planning
Commission, ministry of coal, ministry of railways, ministry
of power and ministry of environment. The coal controller
funds by way of cess collected from the mine owners must be
utilised for the development of infrastructure.
All coal mega projects should be treated at par with
UMPPs of the power sector. A single window clearance
should be aimed for all the mega projects. Comprehensive
mine planning including R & R package and mine closure
plan can be sanctioned at one go. New and modern townships
can be built to settle the PAPs (Project Affected People) and
employment opportunities can be created by building skill
development centres.
The coal ministry and the concerned state government
should jointly set up one organisation, say, the Coal
Development Authority, for each of the major coal-bearing
states of the country. This organization should be vested with
powers for infrastructure development of new coal blocks by
non-CIL companies.
All the coal blocks, which contain low-grade non-coking
coal, suitable for thermal power generation, should be
amalgamated and re-grouped by CMPDI into large-size coal
blocks with each block having a geological reserve of more
than 5,000 mt of coal so that high-capacity (20 to 50 mtpa) coal
mega-projects can be developed.
Advantages of mega projects
♦♦
The time taken for all clearances, like environment and
forests, is the same as that of small projects;
♦♦
The infrastructure such as rail, road etc. can be planned
much in advance;
♦♦
The mechanisation level can be very high and manpower
requirement will be much less;
♦♦
The environment management can be managed by a highly
skilled team and indeed zero pollution level can be easily
done and maintained;
♦♦
The backfilling and post mining restoration of ecology or
the mine closure plan can be done in a much better way;
♦♦
The CSR (corporate social responsibility) and other needs
of local population can be met due to higher profit;
♦♦
Coal beneficiation can be done and cleaner coal can be
transported long distances and rejects can be used for inpit
power generation and supply power to national grid;
♦♦
Draglines of 122 m3 bucket capacity with 128 m boom
length, rope shovels of up to 63 m3 capacity, hydraulic
shovels with 50 m3 bucket capacity and dumpers with 360
to 400 t payload and dozers up to 860 HP are the maximum
sizes of HEMMs available worldwide. Coal India has
already procured and inducted 42 Cum shovel and 240 ton
dumpers at Gevra OCP producing currently 35 mt that is
likely to go up to 50 mt. This can be a huge advantage with
regard to mega projects.
The small and medium size coal blocks, which have
been already allocated by the ministry of coal, should be
amalgamated to constitute large-size coal blocks (with
geological reserve of more than 1,000 million tons of coal) for
facilitating formation of high-capacity coal projects. However,
to protect the interests of the companies who had already been
allocated the small and medium size coal blocks, they should
be assured of supply of coal from the newly constituted largesize
coal projects. Their coal supplies may be in proportion
to the geological coal reserves already allocated to them by
the ministry of coal. The details of modalities of formation of
companies for developing and operating the high-capacity
coal projects may be worked out jointly by the companies who
have been allocated these small and medium size coal blocks.
All public sector companies of state governments,
especially the electricity boards, should jointly develop
infrastructure for long distance rail transport. Alternately they
should jointly wash the coal and beneficiated coal should be
transported hydraulically by pipe line to their destinations for
power generation.
Separate guidelines can be formed for development of
high-grade non-coking coals and coking coals in underground
mines. The organisation or the Coal Development Authority
can work as the facilitator and frame the guidelines.
The basic objective is to bridge the demand-supply gap in
coal by scientifically developing the available coal reserves
of the country in a planned and sustainable manner, with
minimum land acquisition, minimum R&R problems and
minimum environmental degradation.
(The author is managing director of Priya Mining Consultancy and Services
Ltd, which provides consultancy on both underground and opencast coal mines,
including EMP-EIA, forest clearance etc. The company has also produced CDs on
a wide variety of subjects including all DGMS circulars from 1957 till December
2010, a history of disasters in coal mines for the last 100 years and safety and
productivity improvement in both opencast and underground mining. The author
can be contacted at jppanda2003@yahoo.com.)
COAL INSIGHTS 62 March 2012

social buzz
Concern over India’s coal future
Coal Insights Bureau
Coal Insights has recently started a group on LinkedIn called India Coal Market Watch (ICMW). The readers are welcome
to join the group and participate in daily conversations and surveys conducted by ICMW on the online forum. Coal
Insights may, at its discretion, publish the result of such surveys and discussions for the benefit of a larger audience.
Standing on the brink of a new financial year, India’s coal
community looks both positive and concerned about
the future of this all important dry fuel that may make
or mar the country’s growth story. As in any formal forum,
stakeholders of the coal industry raised their voice on ICMW
over issues plaguing the sector and also offered suggestions to
address the same.
Post-budget, the discussions hovered around the measures
announced, especially the duty cut on steam coal imports.
The other issues that were brought into focus included the
growing demand-supply gap, introduction of a coal regulator
and policy issues.
Duty cut on imports
The removal of 5 percent customs duty on non-coking coal in
the budget 2012-13 has been a welcome step to induce more
coal imports into the country. The exemption will result into
increase in imports of non-coking coal by around 1 million
ton (mt) as the prices of imports would come down, industry
experts said.
There was little doubt that the power sector, the major
consumers of non-coking coal, would be significantly benefitted
by this move, they said. Incidentally, nearly two-third of the
electricity generation in the country is based on coal.
However, in case of domestic coal, the coal Railway freight
charges having increased by 22 to 26 percent in March 2012,
prices of coal is expected to increase overall by 14 percent, said
Vinay Sinha, Joint Managing Director at Gupta Corporation.
Call for a regulator
After much dilly dally, the coal
ministry has recently disclosed
that the coal sector would soon get
a regulator as the government has
finalised a draft bill for the purpose.
But that seems too little to pacify
the angst of the industry that often
found government actions falling
short of their expectations.
Reacting to the news, Sameer
Kulkarni, official of ThyssenKrupp Industries India Private
Limited said, “It’s good that there will be regulator finally but
only time tell how effective initiative will be. Any way policies
as such in India are good only on paper....Let’s keep our fingers
crossed and let’s hope for something good for the power sector.”
UG mining
Development of underground
(UG) mines is the only way
forward to meet the future
coal needs of the country
as the reserves available for
open cast mining would
be exhausted in the next 30
years or so, suggested some
members on the online forum.
The country, they pointed out, would soon require an
additional supply of over 200 mt of coal. This would be the
“bare minimum” to add an additional coal-fired generation
capacity of say 45,000 MW under the Twelfth Plan target. In
fact, this would just about meet the power sector needs.
Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL) was
focusing on development of underground mines with 30 such
new projects currently in exploratory stage. The company has
proposed a capital expenditure of close to `11,000 crore in the
Twelfth Plan, of which `7,000 crore would go into a 1,000-MW
power project using the residual reserves of abandoned coal
mines. Similarly, Coal India Limited (CIL) is required to focus
on UG mining more in order to ramp up coal production in
the coming years, they noted.
CIL’s land acquisition
Under pressure to ramp up
production, CIL has sweetened
its offers for land acquisition.
The new rehabilitation and
resettlement (R&R) policy was
recently approved by the CIL
board. The members at ICMW
were divided in their opinion
about this development.
The reports said that the
Indian miner will now offer `500,000 per acre to farmers as
“compensation” to loss of livelihood with options of annuity
income. The compensation, however, will not be available if
the land loser opts for employment in CIL. According to the
previous policy, however, the coal major offered price for
land and one job for land holding in excess of two acres. The
additional compensation will therefore be of help particularly
to the small farmers (owning less than 2 acres), who miss the
employment opportunities.
COAL INSIGHTS 63 March 2012

International
US coal consumption, production to
decline in 2012: EIA
Coal Insights Bureau
The Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the US
has estimated that US coal consumption for 2012 will
fall to 961.9 million short tons (million s.t) in 2012 from
1003.2 million s.t in 2011 in its March 2012 report.
The agency, which is an independent statistical
organisation within the US Department of Energy, further
said coal production will also decline to 1041.3 million s.t from
1089.2 million s.t in 2011.
EIA estimates that electric power sector coal consumption
is forecast to decline by nearly 5 percent in 2012 to 883.9 million
s.t. This is so because generation from natural gas, nuclear,
and wind are likely to increase.
EIA expects that electric power sector coal consumption
will increase by 1.9 percent to 900.9 million s.t in 2013 as
the economic competitiveness of coal-fired generation
improves. In 2011, coal consumption by this sector stood at
928.6 million s.t.
Source: EIA
US coal production
(million short tons)
COAL INSIGHTS 64 March 2012

INTERNATIONAL
Source: EIA
US coal consumption
(million short tons)
The EIA in its March report has also estimated that coal
consumption in retail and other industry would slow down to
51.9 million s.t in 2012 as compared to 52.4 million s.t in 2011.
In 2013, they are projected to show some improvement to 53.1
million s.t.
However, coal consumption by coke plants is estimated
to improve to 26.1 million s.t in 2012 as compared to
22.3 million s.t in 2011 as per the latest report. In 2013,
consumption in this sector is expected to soar further to
26.6 million s.t.
EIA expects coal production to decline by 4.4 percent in
2012 as domestic consumption and exports fall. EIA projects
that secondary inventories will rise in 2012, but decline in
the following year, primarily in the electric power sector, as
consumption grows. This will increase coal production to 1044
million s.t in 2013.
Electricity demand
EIA expects that total US consumption of electricity will
fall slightly during 2012, and then grow by 1.9 percent
during 2013. As per the agency’s latest report, US electricity
consumption will fall to 10.55 billion kilowatthours per day
in 2012 from 10.57 billion kilowatthours per day in 2011. It
will however rise to 10.75 billion kilowatthours per day in
2013.
Growth in retail sales of electricity to the commercial
and industrial sectors during 2012 of 0.7 percent and
0.8 percent, respectively, will be offset by a 2.1 percent
decline in residential sector consumption. Retail sale of
electricity will fall to 10.17 kilowatthours per day from
10.21 kilowatthours per day in 2011. In 2013 it will grow to
10.37 kilowatthours per day.
Residential consumption falls this year as a result of
milder weather compared with last year. EIA estimates that
US residential electricity consumption during January and
February was about 9 percent lower than
during the same months of 2011, primarily
because of the 17 percent decline in heating
degree days nationwide.
Oil consumption
World liquid fuels consumption grew by an
estimated 0.8 million bbl/d to 87.9 million
bbl/d in 2011. EIA expects that this growth
will accelerate over the next two years, with
consumption reaching 89.0 million bbl/d in
2012 and 90.3 million bbl/d in 2013. World
liquid fuels consumption grows by an annual
average of 1.1 million barrels per day (bbl/d) in
2012 and 1.4 million bbl/d in 2013.
Non-OECD countries will account for
essentially all of the world’s consumption
growth over the next two years, with the largest
contributions coming from China, the Middle
East, and Central and South America.
EIA expects increases in global consumption to outpace
production growth in countries outside of the Organization
of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) during the
forecast period. Supply from non-OPEC countries increases
by 0.7 million bbl/d in 2012 and by 0.8 million bbl/d in
2013.
EIA expects that the market will rely on both inventories
and increases in crude oil and non crude liquids production
from OPEC members to meet world demand growth.
Trade
On the export front, the agency said that US coal export
is expected to remain strong but below the 107 million s.t
exported in 2011. In 2012 US coal exports are likely to be at
98.7 million s.t. Forecast US coal exports are estimated to be at
98.5 million s.t in 2013. US coal exports averaged 56 MMst in
the decade preceding 2011.
EIA’s most recent report, however, suggests that US coal
import is likely to get better in 2012 as compared to the year
before. US coal imports stood at 13.1 million s.t in 2011 as
compared to 14.5 estimated in 2012. In 2013, coal imports are
forecast to rise further to 15.7 million s.t.
For Classified Advertisements
contact
Sumit Jalan, +91 91633 48243
or sumit.jalan@mjunction.in
COAL INSIGHTS 65 March 2012

INTERNATIONAL
New coking coal mines to benefit
Indian market
Coal Insights Bureau
New coking coal mines coming up in countries like
Mozambique and Australia would lead to increased
exports of the material to Asian countries in coming
years. The higher exports, according to market sources, would
benefit the Indian steelmakers who were likely to face raw
material constraints, going forward.
The major development is reported from Mozambique,
where Vale S.A., a Brazilian miner and the world’s second
largest mining company, has started exporting coal from
its new Moatize coking coal mine. Recently, the company
exported 35,000 tons of Moatize coal to the Asian markets
from the port of Beira by Panamax vessels.
Moatize coal mine is a large-scale surface coal mine located
1,700 km north of Maputo in the Tete Province. Vale started
producing coal from this mine in mid 2011. The development
at this coal mine has two stages. The Stage-I will come to
completion in 2013 with total production of 11.0 million tons
per annum (mtpa) of salable coal. This will include 8.5 mt of
hard coking coal and 2.5 mt of thermal coal.
The Stage-II is expected to be completed in 2014, when
the production of salable coal will be doubled to 22.0 mtpa.
Of this, the production of hard coking coal would be 17 mtpa
while that of thermal coal would be 5 mtpa.
Meanwhile, in 2011, Moatize coal mine produced a total of
617,000 tons of coal, including 275,000 tons of hard coking coal
and 342,000 tons of thermal coal. Vale commenced coal export
from Moatize coal mine in September, 2011 and exported a
total of 170,000 tons of coal in 2011. Although the major export
item is thermal coal up to now, the full-scale export of hard
coking coal will start in March.
According to market sources, the major portion of exports
from the mine would be catered to Asian markets. This is so
as three major Asian importers of coking coal, namely China,
Japan and India, together account for around 62 percent of the
global coking coal trade as of 2011. Analysts said the share of
these three importers in total imports would rise even further
in the years to come. Among them, India is likely to see the
fastest growth in coking coal imports. The country has chalked
out a robust growth path for its steel industry but lacks any
decent reserves of coking coal, a primary raw material for
steelmaking.
However, the logistics constraints in exporting countries
may restrict exports to these markets. As for Vale, coal
produced at the Moatize coal mine are to be exported from the
port of Beira for the time being. However, going by the coal
shipping capacity at this port and the railing capacity of Sena
Railway, the maximum quantity that can be exported from
this port will be 6.0 mtpa.
Also, the depth at the water route is shallow at the port of
Beira; hence the coal loading on to the vessel has to be done off
the coast in order to have the Panamax and Capesize vessels
fully loaded. This is why Vale could ship only 35,000 tons by a
Panamax vessel this time round.
In view of the port constraints at Beira, Vale is going to
export hard coking coal from Moatize coal mine through the
port of Nacala as well. This port is located in the northeastern
COAL INSIGHTS 66 March 2012

INTERNATIONAL
part of Mozambique and can accommodate Panamax as well
as Capesize vessels.
Top met coal seaborne exporters
Country 2008 2010 2020
Australia 134.3 158.8 255.0
US 35.3 47.8 25.0
Canada 25.4 27.0 50.0
Others 25.6 30.5 85.0*
Total 220.6 264.1 415.0
*Including: Colombia, Russia, Indonesia, Mongolia, New Zealand and
Mozambique
Top seaborne met coal importers
Country 2008 2010 2020
Japan 66.5 62.6 71.0
China 6.9 53.0 110.0
India 26.8 37.2 90.0
South Korea 21.9 18.4 38.0
Brazil 17.9 18.4 38.0
Others 81.0 66.3 75.0
Total 221.0 260.7 415.0
Source: Merlintrade & Consultancy Ltd
Exports from Australia to rise
Meanwhile, the Australian mining sector is targeting to
increase its exports to India for both coking and thermal coal
produced at its mines. According to a new study by Reserve
Bank of Australia’s economic panel, India is the world’s
fourth-largest steel producer but relative to the size of its
economy the country’s steel consumption is low.
“As the [Indian] economy develops further, steel
consumption is likely to increase. Indian steel makers have
plans to expand capacity substantially in order to meet the
anticipated increase in demand….While India has relatively
large reserves of iron ore, its steel makers import most of the
coking coal they require. As Australia is a major supplier of
coking coal to India, these exports from Australia are likely
to expand further,” the report which was done by Markus
Hyvonen and Sean Langcake said.
India is the third-largest importer of coking coal and has
become the second most important destination for Australian
coking coal behind Japan. Almost 85 percent of India’s coking
coal imports, which is estimated at around 30 mt, comes from
Australia.
The coal exporting capacity of the country is likely to
increase further in coming years with the government
giving approvals for new mine developments. Recently,
the Queensland government has conditionally approved a
$4-billion coal mine in the Bowen Basin. The mine is expected
to produce 5.5 mtpa of high-quality hard coking coal, with
first exports taking place by 2014.
Along with coking coal, Australian miners such as Rio
Tinto are planning to capture a significant pie of India’s
thermal coal market as well. Although Australian thermal coal
comes at a premium, the multinational coal producers in that
country are trying to cash in on the excess demand existing in
the Indian power sector, market sources said.
This emerging trend followed enquiries from Indian
private power utilities for coal purchase deals late last year.
Some Indian utilities were looking to procure Australian
thermal coal to meet their immediate fuel requirements.
Kolkata-based CESC Ltd signed a deal in 2011 to pick up a
stake in an Australia-listed mining firm Resource Generation
for $10 million. However, the volume of imports is likely to
remain restricted due to the high cost factor, the sources said.
Among the large players in the Australian mining sector,
Rio Tinto Ltd is looking at the Indian thermal coal market with
some definite plans and strategies. The Anglo-Australian firm
has so far been selling other mineral resources such as coking
coal, alumina, borates and rough diamonds to the Indian
companies. In 2010, Rio Tinto exported around 3 mt of coking
coal to Indian steelmakers such as JSW Steel and Tata Steel.
From 2011, it planned to cater to the thermal coal market as well.
Rio Tinto produces high grade thermal coal from its
deposits in Eastern Australia. In order to compete with
Indonesian coal, the cheapest source for Indian importers,
the company has planned to ship the commodity in large
(Capesize) vessels to India.
Besides Rio Tinto, Australia-based Intra Energy Corporation
(IEC) was looking at the Indian market for exporting thermal
coal. According to recent reports, the company has started
coal mining in Mbalawala Mine, Ngaka coalfield in Tanzania
targeting both the domestic and export thermal coal markets
of Kenya, India and Mauritius.
COAL INSIGHTS 67 March 2012

INTERNATIONAL
UK mining equipment makers
flock to Indian shore
Sanjukta Ganguly
Driven by the slack economic conditions back home, the
UK based mining equipment makers are flocking in
large numbers to the Indian shore. The ongoing boom
in the Indian mining industry, they expect, would help them
achieve “exponential” growth in the sale of their products and
operations in the subcontinent over the next few years.
With this objective in mind, around 10 British companies
took part in a recent roadshow in Kolkata, organised by the
Association of British Mining Equipment Companies (ABMEC)
and supported by British Deputy High Commission, Kolkata.
“India being a country with rich mineral assets, global
players of the mining business are currently eyeing this
country to leverage their business opportunities on a large
scale here. In addition, they
also have large investment
plans up their sleeves in the
coming days,” said Ruth
Bailey, Director General of
ABMEC in a conversation
with Coal Insights.
ABMEC had earned
£595.72 million (mn) from
export business in 2010-
11 and is expecting the
revenue to go up manifold
within the next five years,
out of which a lion’s share
is expected to be mopped
up from the Indian market.
Ruth Bailey, Director General, ABMEC
ABMEC’s performance in 2010-11
Total mining: £721.23 mn
Total non-mining: £702.89 mn
Mining Split
♦♦
Export: £595.72 mn
♦♦
Domestic: £125.51 mn
♦♦
ABMEC Members
♦♦
AmpcontrolAllenwest
♦♦
ATB Morley Ltd
♦♦
Baldwin & Francis Ltd
♦♦
Clayton Equipment Ltd
♦♦
Davis Derby Ltd
♦♦
Don Valley Engineering Ltd
♦♦
Dosco Overseas Engineering
♦♦
Fenner Dunlop Europe
♦♦
Gai–Tronics
♦♦
Trolex
Mining technology and safety
The UK and international mining sectors have seen dramatic
changes in recent times and have been faced with unexpected
challenges. However, the British mining equipment
manufacturers have responded to these challenges by
developing new and ever more innovative solutions in the
world of mineral extraction. Hence, according to Bailey, the
COAL INSIGHTS 68 March 2012

INTERNATIONAL
effort of all the member companies of ABMEC is
focused on making mining safer, more efficient and
profitable for all producers.
ABMEC Member Companies supply to:
♦♦
UK and world markets
♦♦
All major mineral extraction industries
♦♦
Soft and hard rock mining
♦♦
Surface & Tunnelling industries
Majority of these member companies
have already invested heavily in research and
development of better products in terms of safety
and efficiency. Many more such investments are
already in the pipeline. Keeping the safety aspect
of the mine workers in view, how their products
can be used in an efficient manner yielding better
results is now the main focus area of the mining
equipment manufacturers besides the profit earning
aspect, informed a senior official of Baldwin &
Francis Limited, one of the leading UK based manufacturers
of flameproof multi-motor load centres, variable speed
drives, vacuum circuit breakers, distribution transformers,
intrinsically safe PLC’s and mine wide control and automation
systems.
Another leading global player ATB Morley, manufacturer
of bespoke electric motors principally for underground coal
mining with a turnover of approximately £26 mn of which 90
percent comes from export, is also planning major investment
in India in the coming year, Andy Tye, Sales Manager of
the company said. He however did not reveal the proposed
investment figures.
Potential vs obstacles
Steven G. Gretton, Managing Director of Clayton Equipment
Limited said the main impediment to the growth of the mining
equipment industry in India is “bureaucracy”. Despite the
country holding immense potential for the mining equipment
manufacturers, the growth of this industry is rather slow in
comparison to the potential. However, India with its vast
mineral assets still remains one of the main lucrative locations
for the UK based mining equipment manufacturers.
Until recently, China has been one of the prime options
for investment by the foreign mining equipment makers, but
the mining industry in China is becoming nearly stagnant,
showing hardly any growth in recent times. In contrast, the
Indian mining industry is about to take a leap
forward with so many mining equipment
makers waiting for their turns to invest in the
industry, he added.
Another equipment manufacturer with
operations in more than 16 countries echoed
his views adding that more governmental
support and industry-friendly policies can
add to the boom of the mining industry in
India which might be sustained over a long
period of time.
With the Indian mining sector opening up
such lucrative business opportunities for the
international mining equipment manufacturers,
they are already putting their best foot forward
to tap this market in a major way. They have
even decided to work closely with India in
continuous support of their strategic aims. How
do their business expansion plans shape up in
India in the coming years is to be watched.
COAL INSIGHTS 69 March 2012

logistics
Dedicated Freight Corridor to be
ready by end of 2017
Coal Insights Bureau
In order to handle the increased traffic volume, the Indian
Railways is implementing the Dedicated Freight Corridor
(DFC) project, which should be ready by the end of the
Twelfth Plan (2016-17). As per the plans, the maximum axle
load of the track will be increased to 25 tons in the dedicated
corridors from 22.82 tons elsewhere.
“It is expected that the contract for civil and track works
for about 1,000 route kilometres on Eastern and Western DFC
would be awarded during 2012-13,” Dinesh Trivedi, former
Railways minister of India said while presenting the Railway
Budget for 2012-13.
The Railways has taken up the project of constructing DFCs
from Ludhiana to Dankuni (Eastern Corridor) and another
from Dadri to Jawaharlal Nehru Port (Western Corridor)
for efficient freight transportation to and from ports and to
facilitate decongestion, he added. This project, estimated
to cost about `77,000 crore, includes interlinking of the two
routes at Khurja in Uttar Pradesh. Hence, completion of this
DFC project is undoubtedly about to facilitate coal movement
to a large extent.
Funding assistance from World Bank and JICA has
been tied up. A total of 6,500 hectares of land, out of 10,700
hectares required, has already been acquired so far. Moreover,
the bidding process for the civil and track works has also
commenced.
Rail freight
Meanwhile, the share of coal in the total traffic handled by the
Indian Railways is expected to go up to 49.54 percent by 2016-
17 from the current level of 46.13 percent and this increased
share of coal would be driven by higher movement of the
material from the ports as well as from the captive blocks,
according to a senior official of the Railway Board.
Most of this coal would be transported to the power sector.
According to an estimate, the power sector’s requirement of
coal would go up to 740 million tons (mt) by 2016-17 from
460 mt currently, he added. However, about the overall traffic
growth, the official said it is estimated to go up by 40 percent
during the Twelfth Plan period over 2011-12, the terminal
year of the Eleventh Plan. Along with this, passenger traffic is
expected to double during this period.
“The incremental traffic in the next five years is expected to
be around 80 mt, which is significantly higher than the highest
figure of 65 mt experienced so far,” he added.
As for the coal sector, the Railways has planned to connect
the main coalfields and all ports with the power plants in next
few years. In this regard, however, the Railways has asked
the coal traders and importers to space out their imports all
through the year and import the majority part in the first six
months of a fiscal year (April-September) when the demand
for rakes from other sectors remain low.
Supplementing Railways efforts, Coal India Ltd (CIL) has
proposed to invest a total of around `5,000 to `6,000 crore on
a number of railway projects in its mining areas in Jharkhand
and Chhattisgarh for smooth evacuation of coal from its mines
and transportation to consumers. As part of this initiative, CIL
has already identified projects in Maan Raigadh coalfields in
Chhattisgarh and North Karanpura coalfields in Jharkhand
where it will set up rail tracks.
CIL has already proposed investment of `350 crore for
Barood and Anuppur section that will connect to Katni line
and `1,200 crore for Bhoopdevpur to Barood section which
will connect to Howrah-Mumbai line for which they are
carrying out survey for laying down the rail line.
To a question, the railway official said, the Railway has set
a wagon (Boxon and BOBR) induction target of 9,337 units in
2011-12 against 5,619 units in 2010-11. Total number of wagons
would reach 25,045 units by March 2012 compared to 16,638
units in 2010-11 and 9,575 units in 2006-07.
Meanwhile, the Railways has started joining the rakes
of two trains and deploying double engines to reduce the
transport time And this reduce traffic pressure. “We have
already run 35 such trains. In future, we will increase the
number of such trains. This is a strategy adopted to increase
the number of rakes under present circumstances and thus to
handle increased traffic pressure,” the official added.
COAL INSIGHTS 70 March 2012

Logistics
Indian Railways Apr-Feb commodity
freight revenue up 9.17%
Coal Insights Bureau
Indian Railways revenue earnings from commodity-wise
freight revenue moved up by 9.17 percent to Rs 61,215.49
crore during the first eleven months (April-February)
of 2011-12 from Rs 56,073.37 crore earned during the
corresponding period of the previous financial year, according
to information available with Coal Insights.
The commodity-wise freight traffic volume during the period
increased by 5.16 percent to 875.6 million tons (mt) as compared to
832.66 mt during the corresponding period last year.
The data revealed that the Railways’ revenue earnings in
February 2012 stood at Rs 5,832.69 crore while the freight traffic
volume stood at 83.76 mt. The railways earned Rs 2,505.58
crore from transportation of 40.22 mt of coal in February
2012, marginally lower than Rs 2583.54 crore earned from
transportation of 41.35 mt of coal in January 2012. However,
the company had earned Rs 2,069.47 crore from transportation
of 34.35 mt of coal in February 2011.
Railways’ earnings from transportation of iron ore for
exports, steel plants and other domestic uses fell to Rs 418.72
crore (8.11 mt) in February 2012 from Rs 481.60 crore (8.25 mt)
in January 2012 whereas in February 2011, Indian railways
had earned Rs 945.81 crore from transportation of 10.12 mt of
iron ore.
Earnings from transportation of cement stood at Rs 587.4
crore (9.29 mt) in February 2012, down from Rs 615.32 crore
(9.92 mt) earned during the previous month whereas the
earning figure stood at Rs 542.52 crore (8.62 mt) during the
corresponding month of the previous year.
Earnings from transportation of foodgrains stood at Rs
451.06 crore from transportation of 4.26 mt of foodgrains
which stood at Rs 434.18 crore(4.24 mt) in January 2012 and Rs
399.77 crore (4.02 mt) in February 2011.
Revenues earned from transportation of fertilizers in
February 2012 stood at Rs 382.84 crore (4.74 mt) as compared
to Rs 260.68 crore (3.33 mt) and Rs 462.01 crore (5.32 mt) earned
during January 2012.
Commodity Quantity (in mt) Earning (in Rs crore)
Feb'11 Feb'12 Feb'11 Feb'12
Coal
i) for steel plants 3.5 3.8 147.55 177.43
ii) for washeries 0.11 0.12 1.33 0.98
iii) for thermal power houses 22.71 27.13 1427.69 1758.83
iv)for public use 8.03 9.17 492.9 568.34
v) Total 34.35 40.22 2069.47 2505.58
Raw material for steel plants except iron ore 1.26 1.21 96.19 94.54
Pig iron and finished steel -
i) from steel plants 2.13 2.23 255.41 298.46
ii) from other points 0.58 0.71 55.18 52.48
iii) Total 2.71 2.94 310.59 350.94
Iron ore -
i) for export 2.31 0.05 584.48 12.65
ii) for steel plants 3.78 5.12 114.55 214.84
iii) for other domestic users 4.03 2.94 246.78 191.23
iv) Total 10.12 8.11 945.81 418.72
Cement 8.62 9.29 542.52 587.4
Foodgrains 4.02 4.26 399.77 451.06
Fertilizers 3.33 4.74 260.68 382.84
Mineral Oil (POL) 3.19 3.29 277.04 304.78
Container Service -
i) Domestic containers 0.88 0.86 83.18 77.84
ii) EXIM containers 2.13 2.4 183.67 213.34
iii) Total 3.01 3.26 266.85 291.18
Balance other goods 6.19 6.44 416.54 445.65
Total revenue earning traffic. 76.8 83.76 5585.46 5832.69
COAL INSIGHTS 71 March 2012

Logistics
Port traffic down 0.74% y-o-y in Apr-Feb
Coal Insights Bureau
The 12 major Indian ports have handled 510.829 million
tons (mt) of traffic during the April-February period
of the current financial year, 0.74 percent lower than
514.636 mt recorded during the corresponding period last
year.
According to data released by the Indian Ports Association
(IPA), the movement of thermal coal through the major ports
was up 15.87 percent to 45.762 mt during April 2011-February
2012, compared to 39.494 mt achieved during the same period
last year.
The volume of coking coal, however, fell marginally by
Traffic handled at major ports
(During April to February, 2012*
vis-a-vis April to February, 2011)
(*) Tentative (in ‘000 tons)
April To February
% Variation
Ports
Traffic
Against Prev.
2012* 2011 Year Traffic
1 2 3 4
Kolkata
Kolkata Dock System 11142 11584 -3.82
Haldia Dock Complex 28623 31611 -9.45
Total: Kolkata 39765 43195 -7.94
Paradip 49844 50644 -1.58
Visakhapatnam 62184 61471 1.16
Ennore 13580 9241 46.95
Chennai 51300 55664 -7.84
Tuticorin 25148 22222 13.17
Cochin 18166 15982 13.67
New Mangalore 29765 28869 3.10
Mormugao 35239 44051 -20.00
Mumbai 50223 49886 0.68
Jnpt 60225 58552 2.86
Kandla 75390 74859 0.71
Total: 510829 514636 -0.74
0.38 percent to 25.976 mt during the same period, the data
showed.
Among the major ports, Paradip port had the distinction of
handling the highest volume of thermal coal of around 14.839
mt during the period. Visakhapatnam port, on the other hand,
shipped the highest quantity of 6.347 mt of coking coal during
the period.
Movement of coking coal through Paradip, Kolkata,
Chennai and Mormugao ports declined during the period
when compared to the corresponding period last year.
Movement of iron ore through the major ports showed
a significant drop of 28.61 percent during the period under
review. The major ports together handled 56.226 mt of iron
ore during the April-February period compared to 78.754 mt
in the corresponding period last year.
Mormugao port handled the highest volume of 26.652 mt
of iron ore during the April-February period of the current
fiscal. This volume, however, was about 9.05 mt less than the
iron ore traffic moved during the same period last fiscal. The
port has shown a negative growth of 20 percent during the
period.
Movement of container traffic both in terms of tonnage and
TEUs showed an increase during the April-February period.
The major ports handled 109.511 mt of tonnage and 7.094
million TEUs during the period under review compared to
102.615 mt of tonnage and 6.867 mt of TEUs respectively.
Eight major ports showed positive growth in traffic
handling during the April-February period of the current
fiscal, while the remaining four showed negative growth on a
year-on-year basis.
In terms of growth, Ennore port topped the list with a
record 46.95 percent increase in cargo throughput. Mumbai
port’s growth was lowest at about 0.68 percent during the
period. In terms of traffic volume, Kandla port clinched the
top rank with a cargo volume of 75.390 mt recorded for the
period. The Mormugao port registered the highest decline of
20 percent in traffic handling during the period.
COAL INSIGHTS 72 March 2012

Power sector update
List of critical thermal power stations having critical coal stock of
less than 7 days (as on 29-02-2012)
NORTHERN
1 Badarpur Due to less receipt of coal from CCL during the month of February, 2012
2 Kota TPS Due to inadequate availability of coal at Chabbra TPS rakes were diverted to Chabbra TPS
3 Suratgarh Due to inadequate availability of coal at Chabbra TPS rakes were diverted to Chabbra TPS
4 Harduaganj TPS Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012
5 Chabbra Due to inadequate availability of coal
6 Dadri (NCTPP) Due to less receipt of coal from CCL during the month of February, 2012
7 Tanda Due to higher generation
8 Unchahar Due to higher generation
9 Anpara C Due to inadequate availability of coal
WESTERN
10 Koradi Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012
11 Bhusawal TPS Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012
12 Ukai Due to less receipt of coal during the month of February, 2012
13 Parli TPS Due to less receipt from SCCL and MCL during the month of February, 2012
SOUTHERN
14 Dr. N. Tata Rao Due to higher generation
15 Tuticorin Due to less receipt of coal from MCL during the month of February, 2012
16 Rayalaseema Due to less receipt from SCCL /MCL during the month of February, 2012
17 Simhadri Due to higher generation
18 Ramagundem STPS Due to higher generation
19 Raichur Due to less receipt from WCL /MCL during the month of February, 2012
20 Bellary Due to less receipt of coal from captive block during the month of February, 2012
EASTERN
21 Muzaffarpur TPS Coal supply regulated as Bihar declined to take its electricity due to financial viability.
22 Kahalgaon
Due to inadequate coal availability in linked mine ECL (Rajmahal) and inability of railways to supply more imported rakes
due to change in tracks.
23 Bokaro-B Due to higher generation
24 Chandrapura(DVC) Due to higher generation
25 Talcher STPS Due to less import.
26 Durgapur steel TPS Coal supply yet to start by CIL
27 Kodarma TPS Coal supply yet to start by CIL
28 Bandel Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.
29 Kolaghat Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.
30 Bakreswar TPS Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.
31 Sagardighi Due to higher generation
32 Santaldih Due to huge outstanding dues coal supply affected.
33 Farakka Due to inadequate coal availability in linked mine ECL (Rajmahal)
34 Mejia
Due to Higher Turn around time of rakes between Raniganj and the power station and no import by DVC and supply of
boulder/stones by BCCL.
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 73 March 2012

power sector update
ALL INDIA ENERGY GENERATION,
GENERATION (GWH)
Category /
Regions
Monitored
Capacity
(MW)
Target
April 2011 to
March 2012
PROGRAMME
ACTUAL*
February 2012
ACTUAL SAME
MONTH (2010-11)
% OF
PROGRAMME
% OF LAST
YEAR
PROGRAMME
THERMAL 124308.92 712234.00 59922.00 60980.22 55749.25 101.77 109.38 642275.00
NUCLEAR 4780.00 25130.00 1927.00 2702.30 2653.80 140.23 101.83 23004.00
HYDRO 38848.40 112050.00 6645.65 7236.72 7241.39 108.89 99.94 104193.47
BHUTAN IMP 0.00 5586.00 48.00 68.37 63.88 142.44 107.03 5502.00
TOTAL 167937.32 855000.00 68542.65 70987.61 65708.32 103.57 108.03 780949.47
NORTHERN REGION
THERMAL 30778.26 173757.00 14567.00 15667.54 13864.18 107.56 113.01 158198.00
NUCLEAR 1620.00 8760.00 627.00 869.80 896.77 138.72 96.99 7978.00
HYDRO 15078.25 53474.07 2556.74 3127.28 3739.45 122.32 114.16 50048.54
TOTAL 47476.51 235991.07 17750.74 19664.62 17500.40 110.78 112.37 216224.54
WESTERN REGION
THERMAL 43151.31 246627.00 20744.00 20852.26 19874.00 100.52 104.92 224067.00
NUCLEAR 1840.00 9874.00 760.00 1182.95 1125.32 155.65 105.12 9010.00
HYDRO 7392.00 14644.91 1089.44 1146.16 1321.53 105.21 86.73 13461.48
TOTAL 52383.31 271145.91 22593.44 23181.37 22320.85 102.60 103.86 246538.48
SOUTHERN REGION
THERMAL 25030.80 156395.00 13250.00 13510.52 12990.82 101.97 104.00 142148.00
NUCLEAR 1320.00 6469.00 540.00 649.55 631.71 120.29 102.82 6016.00
HYDRO 11372.45 30493.04 2305.73 2519.05 2519.15 109.25 100.00 28002.30
TOTAL 37723.25 193384.04 16095.73 16679.12 16141.68 103.62 103.33 176166.30
EASTERN REGION
THERMAL 24490.05 131047.00 11002.00 10573.53 8621.79 96.11 122.64 119822.00
HYDRO 3847.70 9305.99 512.76 336.42 515.17 65.61 65.30 8755.89
TOTAL 28337.75 140352.99 11514.76 10909.95 9136.96 94.75 119.40 128577.89
NORTH EASTERN REGION
THERMAL 858.50 4408.00 359.00 376.65 398.46 104.92 94.53 4015.00
HYDRO 1158.00 4131.99 180.98 108.07 146.09 59.71 73.97 3925.26
TOTAL 2016.50 8539.99 539.98 484.72 544.55 89.77 89.01 7940.26
Provisional based on actual-cum-assessment
COAL INSIGHTS 74 March 2012

Power sector update
PROGRAMME AND PLANT LOAD FACTOR
PLANT LOAD FACTOR %
APRIL 2011 – February 2012 February 2012 APRIL 2011 - February 2012
ACTUAL
ACTUAL SAME
PERIOD (2010-11)
% OF
PROGRAMME
% OF LAST
YEAR
PROGRAMME
ACTUAL*
ACTUAL SAME
MONTH (2010-11)
PROGRAMME
ACTUAL*
ACTUAL SAME
PERIOD (2010-11)
642275.08 601759.40 99.08 106.73 70.38 78.47 80.99 68.57 72.81 74.25
29415.12 23314.32 127.87 126.17 59.16 81.23 86.60 61.14 76.54 63.69
122046.30 104984.03 117.13 116.25
5211.06 5548.98 94.71 93.91
798947.56 735606.73 102.30 108.61
162520.37 149837.35 102.73 108.46 70.48 80.48 83.39 71.20 77.50 78.07
9865.67 8539.48 123.66 115.53 59.27 77.14 82.38 65.28 75.75 65.76
60304.10 52039.63 120.49 115.88
232690.14 210416.46 107.62 110.59
224987.80 213829.35 100.41 105.22 70.95 77.75 83.36 68.66 71.79 74.45
12552.63 9413.72 139.32 133.34 59.35 92.37 91.01 60.90 84.85 63.82
18183.27 13632.90 135.08 133.38
255723.70 236875.97 103.73 107.6
142931.83 132691.54 100.55 107.72 77.37 90.65 90.96 72.73 81.24 79.28
6996.82 5361.12 116.30 130.51 58.78 70.70 85.46 56.69 65.93 60.41
30696.11 27175.54 109.62 112.94
180624.76 165231.20 102.53 109.32
107690.42 101385.47 89.88 106.22 63.99 67.45 66.11 62.58 62.42 65.81
9190.10 8396.65 104.96 109.45
116880.52 109782.12 90.90 106.47
4144.94 4015.69 103.24 103.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3672.98 3736.31 93.57 98.31
7817.92 7752.00 98.46 100.85
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 75 March 2012

Power sector update
List of utility/organisation whose PLF
achievement were lower than the respective
programme during February 2012
Name of Power Station
I. CENTRAL
PLF in %
Programme Achievement Shortfall
BADARPUR TPS 85.19 82.89 2.30
KAHALGAON TPS 86.88 74.13 12.75
FARAKKA TPS 76.90 66.11 10.79
TANDA TPS 96.66 94.27 2.39
DURGAPUR TPS 68.04 66.38 1.66
II. STATE
HPGCL 66.66 64.39 2.27
Capacity Addition & Generation during Feb 2012
Description
February 2012 February 2012
Target Achivement Target Achivement
CAPACITY ADDITION (MW)
THERMAL 250.00 972.00 851.00 250.00
HYDRO 132.00 0.00 165.00 0.00
NUCLEAR 1000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTAL 1382.00 972.00 1016.00 250.00
GENERATION (MU)
THERMAL 59922.00 60980.21 58216.22 55749.25
NUCLEAR 1927.00 2702.30 1804.00 2653.80
HYDRO 6645.65 7237.60 6535.14 7241.39
BHUTAN IMPORT 48.00 68.37 137.14 63.88
TOTAL 68542.65 70988.48 66692.50 65708.32
Note: Generation (MU) achieved in February 2012 is provisional.
Target/Achievement in capacity addition
(MW) during February 2012
PSPCL 81.55 80.34 1.21
GMDCL 72.41 36.13 36.28
TNGDCL 79.48 75.02 4.46
JSEB 27.99 8.99 19.00
BSEB 23.17 8.01 15.16
OPGC 93.05 78.84 14.21
Achievement in generation (MU)
during February 2012
TVNL 76.97 73.68 3.29
Source: Central Electricity Authority
Sector-wise PLF(%) programme
and achievements (thermal)
February 2012 April 2011 - February 2012
SECTOR
PROG. (%) ACH. (%)* PROG. (%) ACH. (%)*
Central Sector 77.58 89.59 73.95 81.62
Source: Central Electricity Authority
All India PLF (%) during February 2012
State Sector 67.03 74.37 65.11 67.42
Pvt. UTL Sector 75.23 67.60 75.33 75.81
All India 70.38 78.47 68.47 72.81
* Provisional based on actual-cum Assessment
Source: Central Electricity Authority
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 76 March 2012

Power sector update
Schemes
Capacity Addition for February 2012 and April 2011 - February 2012 (MW)
Status of
Schemes
Target
2011-12
February 2012 April 2011 - February 2012 Deviation
Target Achievement Target Achievement (+) / (-)
Central 3570.00 0.00 250.00 3570.00 3070.00 -500.00
Thermal
State 4101.00 250.00 351.00 4101.00 1851.00 -2250.00
Pvt. 6965.00 0.00 371.00 6965.00 7130.50 165.50
Total 14636.00 250.00 972.00 14636.00 12051.50 -2584.50
Central 715.00 60.00 0.00 615.00 100.00 -515.00
Hydro
State 195.00 72.00 0.00 195.00 81.00 -114.00
Pvt. 1170.00 0.00 0.00 1170.00 1100.00 -70.00
Total 2080.00 132.00 0.00 1980.00 1281.00 -699.00
Nuclear
Central 1000.00 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 -1000.00
Total 1000.00 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 -1000.00
Central 5285.00 1060.00 250.00 5185.00 3170.00 -2015.00
All India
State 4296.00 322.00 351.00 4296.00 1932.00 -2364.00
Pvt. 8135.00 0.00 371.00 8135.00 8230.50 95.50
Total 17716.00 1382.00 972.00 17616.00 13332.50 -4283.50
Source: Central Electricity Authority
Programme and Achievememt of Energy Generation (MU)
Gen. Sch.
Target
February 2012 April 2011 - February 2012
Sector-wise
20011-2012
Programme Achievement* % Ach. Programme Achievement* % Ach.
Thermal
Central Sector 279561.00 23836.00 24487.69 102.73 255152.00 254917.91 99.91
State Sector 297818.00 24807.00 25842.08 104.17 270412.00 269588.84 99.70
Pvt.IPP Sector 108835.00 9230.00 8811.61 95.47 98986.00 94054.32 95.02
Pvt.UTL Sector 26020.00 2049.00 1838.83 89.74 23700.00 23714.00 100.06
Total 712234.00 59922.00 60980.21 101.77 648250.00 642275.07 99.08
Hydro
Central Sector 42779.02 2121.47 2294.08 108.14 39988.05 47699.42 119.28
State Sector 61941.98 4125.64 4627.86 112.17 57403.03 65906.31 114.81
Pvt.IPP Sector 5764.00 294.69 194.56 66.02 5372.59 6912.98 128.67
Pvt.UTL Sector 1565.00 103.85 121.10 116.61 1429.80 1529.53 106.98
Total 112050.00 6645.65 7237.60 108.91 104193.47 122048.24 117.14
Nuclear
Central Sector 25130.00 1927.00 2702.30 140.23 23004.00 29415.12 127.87
Total 25130.00 1927.00 2702.30 140.23 23004.00 29415.12 127.87
Bhutan Import 5586.00 48.00 68.37 142.44 5502.00 5211.06 94.71
All India
Central Sector 347470.02 27884.47 29484.07 105.74 318144.05 332032.45 104.37
State Sector 359759.98 28932.64 30469.94 105.31 327815.03 335495.15 102.34
Pvt. Sector 142184.00 11677.54 10966.10 93.91 129488.39 126210.83 97.47
Total 855000.00 68542.65 70988.48 103.57 780949.47 798949.49 102.30
* Provisional based on actual-cum-Assesment Source: Central Electricity Authority
Capacity addition target & achievement (MW)
April 2011 - February 2012
All India energy generation during
April 2011 - February 2012
Source: Central Electricity Authority
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 77 March 2012

Power sector update
Power Supply Position (Provisional)
State/System/
Region
February 2012 April 2011 - February 2012
(Figures in net MU)
Requirement Availability Surplus/Deficit (-) Requirement Availability Surplus/Deficit (-)
(MU) (MU) (MU) (%) (MU) (MU) (MU) (%)
Chandigarh 103 103 0 0.0 1,459 1,455 -4 -0.3
Delhi 1,705 1,702 -3 -0.2 25,004 24,929 -75 -0.3
Haryana 3,049 2,804 -245 -8.0 34,260 32,707 -1,553 -4.5
Himachal Pradesh 683 680 -3 -0.4 7,468 7,414 -54 -0.7
Jammu & Kashmir* 1,319 989 -330 -25.0 12,967 9,927 -3,040 -23.4
Punjab 3,007 2,923 -84 -2.8 41,932 40,599 -1,333 -3.2
Rajasthan 4,786 4,616 -170 -3.6 46,541 44,674 -1,867 -4.0
Uttar Pradesh 6,801 5,947 -854 -12.6 74,354 65,890 -8,464 -11.4
Uttarakhand 879 838 -41 -4.7 9,619 9,344 -275 -2.9
Northern Region 22,332 20,602 -1,730 -7.7 253,604 236,939 -16,665 -6.6
Chattisgarh 1,134 1,108 -26 -2.3 13,352 12,967 -385 -2.9
Gujarat 5,878 5,859 -19 -0.3 68,038 67,788 -250 -0.4
Madhya Pradesh 4,716 3,705 -1,011 -21.4 45,539 38,044 -7,495 -16.5
Maharashtra 11,986 9,787 -2,199 -18.3 129,870 107,521 -22,349 -17.2
Daman & Diu 160 143 -17 -10.6 1,987 1,781 -206 -10.4
Dadar Nagar Haveli 345 344 -1 -0.3 4,091 4,060 -31 -0.8
Goa 207 205 -2 -1.0 2,763 2,727 -36 -1.3
Western Region 24,426 21,151 -3,275 -13.4 265,640 234,888 -30,752 -11.6
Andhra Pradesh 7,712 7,107 -605 -7.8 81,810 76,641 -5,169 -6.3
Karnataka 5,680 4,954 -726 -12.8 54,437 48,564 -5,873 -10.8
Kerala 1,669 1,626 -43 -2.6 17,940 17,562 -378 -2.1
Tamil Nadu 7,135 5,526 -1,609 -22.6 77,668 70,660 -7,008 -9.0
Puducherry 167 165 -2 -1.2 1,965 1,937 -28 -1.4
Lakshadweep # 3 3 0 0 34 34 0 0
Southern Region 22,363 19,378 -2,985 -13.3 233,820 215,364 -18,456 -7.9
Bihar 1,200 920 -280 -23.3 13,044 10,163 -2,881 -22.1
DVC 1,483 1,402 -81 -5.5 15,118 14,511 -607 -4.0
Jharkhand 477 442 -35 -7.3 5,619 5,439 -180 -3.2
Orissa 2,001 1,883 -118 -5.9 20,916 20,616 -300 -1.4
West Bengal 2,924 2,885 -39 -1.3 35,068 34,674 -394 -1.1
Sikkim 24 24 0 0.0 340 336 -4 -1.2
Andaman- Nicobar# 21 21 0 0 223 183 -40 -18
Eastern Region 8,109 7,556 -553 -6.8 90,105 85,739 -4,366 -4.8
Arunachal Pradesh 44 41 -3 -6.8 549 504 -45 -8.2
Assam 460 430 -30 -6.5 5,573 5,263 -310 -5.6
Manipur 37 32 -5 -13.5 512 467 -45 -8.8
Meghalaya 154 108 -46 -29.9 1,766 1,335 -431 -24.4
Mizoram 32 29 -3 -9.4 366 328 -38 -10.4
Nagaland 39 35 -4 -10.3 518 472 -46 -8.9
Tripura 71 68 -3 -4.2 871 825 -46 -5.3
N. Eastern Region 837 743 -94 -11.2 10,155 9,194 -961 -9.5
All India 78,067 69,430 -8,637 -11.1 853,324 782,124 -71,200 -8.3
# Lakshadweep and A & N Islands stand-alone systems, power supply position of these, does not form part of regional requirement and availability.
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 78 March 2012

Power sector update
State/System/
Region
Peak Demand/Peak Met (Provisional)
February 2012 April’11 - February 2012
(Figures in net MW)
Peak Demand Peak Met Surplus/Deficit (-) Peak Demand Peak Met Surplus/Deficit (-)
(MU) (MU) (MU) (%) (MU) (MU) (MU) (%)
Chandigarh 212 212 0 0.0 263 263 0 0.0
Delhi 3,665 3,608 -57 -1.6 5,031 5,028 -3 -0.1
Haryana 5,440 5,078 -362 -6.7 6,533 6,259 -274 -4.2
Himachal Pradesh 1,159 1,140 -19 -1.6 1,335 1,295 -40 -3.0
Jammu & Kashmir* 2,165 1,649 -516 -23.8 2,361 1,771 -590 -25.0
Punjab 5,063 4,913 -150 -3.0 10,471 8,701 -1,770 -16.9
Rajasthan 7,779 7,545 -234 -3.0 8,188 7,545 -643 -7.9
Uttar Pradesh 11,358 10,318 -1,040 -9.2 12,038 11,616 -422 -3.5
Uttarakhand 1,542 1,542 0 0.0 1,612 1,586 -26 -1.6
Northern Region 36,684 33,167 -3,517 -9.6 40,248 37,117 -3,131 -7.8
Chattisgarh 2,935 2,847 -88 -3.0 3,239 2,851 -388 -12.0
Gujarat 9,774 9,638 -136 -1.4 10,951 10,759 -192 -1.8
Madhya Pradesh 8,874 7,416 -1,458 -16.4 9,151 7,842 -1,309 -14.3
Maharashtra 19,697 16,417 -3,280 -16.7 21,069 16,417 -4,652 -22.1
Daman & Diu 284 259 -25 -8.8 301 276 -25 -8.3
Dadar Nagar Haveli 569 569 0 0.0 615 605 -10 -1.6
Goa 435 406 -29 -6.7 514 471 -43 -8.4
Western Region 41,277 35,535 -5,742 -13.9 42,352 35,952 -6,400 -15.1
Andhra Pradesh 12,648 11,313 -1,335 -10.6 13,254 11,591 -1,663 -12.5
Karnataka 9,883 8,065 -1,818 -18.4 9,883 8,065 -1,818 -18.4
Kerala 3,436 3,216 -220 -6.4 3,436 3,216 -220 -6.4
Tamil Nadu 11,866 8,980 -2,886 -24.3 11,911 10,566 -1,345 -11.3
Puducherry 288 286 -2 -0.7 335 320 -15 -4.5
Lakshadweep # 8 8 0 0 8 8 0 0
Southern Region 35,343 29,982 -5,361 -15.2 35,343 31,489 -3,854 -10.9
Bihar 1,879 1,470 -409 -21.8 2,031 1,738 -293 -14.4
DVC 2,126 2,014 -112 -5.3 2,318 2,026 -292 -12.6
Jharkhand 851 779 -72 -8.5 1,030 842 -188 -18.3
Orissa 3,247 3,098 -149 -4.6 3,589 3,526 -63 -1.8
West Bengal 5,777 5,712 -65 -1.1 6,555 6,378 -177 -2.7
Sikkim 90 90 0 0.0 100 95 -5 -5.0
Andaman- Nicobar# 48 48 0 0 48 48 0 0
Eastern Region 13,563 12,780 -783 -5.8 14,505 13,971 -534 -3.7
Arunachal Pradesh 90 87 -3 -3.3 121 118 -3 -2.5
Assam 987 946 -41 -4.2 1,112 1,053 -59 -5.3
Manipur 105 104 -1 -1.0 116 115 -1 -0.9
Meghalaya 290 255 -35 -12.1 319 267 -52 -16.3
Mizoram 82 76 -6 -7.3 82 78 -4 -4.9
Nagaland 100 99 -1 -1.0 111 105 -6 -5.4
Tripura 165 165 0 0.0 215 214 -1 -0.5
N -Eastern Region 1,813 1,622 -191 -10.5 1,920 1,782 -138 -7.2
All India 128,680 113,086 -15,594 -12.1 128,680 114,233 -14,447 -11.2
# Lakshadweep and A & N Islands stand-alone systems, power supply position of these, does not form part of regional requirement and availability.
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 79 March 2012

Power sector update
Power supply to agricultural sector during February 2012
State/Region
Average hours of supply
Northern Region
Chandigarh
24 hrs./day
Delhi
N/A
Haryana
Three Phase Supply : average 10.40 hrs/day
HP
24 hrs./day
J & K –
–
Punjab
Three phase supply: 4.94 hrs/day
Rajasthan
Three phase supply: 06.00 hrs/day
Uttar Pradesh
Three phase supply: average 9.47 hrs/day
Uttarakhand
23.43 hrs./day
Western Region
Chattisgarh Three phase supply: 18 hrs/day –
Gujarat
Only 8 hours power supply in staggered form in rotation of day and night is given to Agriculture. No supply during rest of 16 hours.
Jyotigram Yojana 24 hrs.
Madhya Pradesh Three phase supply: 11:23 hrs /day (average) Single phase supply: 00:00 hrs./Day (average)
Maharashtra Three phase supply: 8 hrs/day (average) Single phase supply: 16 hrs/day (average)
Goa
No restriction
Southern Region
Andhra Pradesh Three phase supply: 07 hrs/day. –
Karnataka Three phase/single phase supply: 06 hrs/day No supply: 6-12 hrs/day
Kerala
No restrictions
Tamil Nadu Three phase supply: 9 hrs/day Single phase supply: 15 hrs/day
Puducherry
No restrictions
Eastern Region
Bihar
About 18 hrs
Jharkhand
About 20 hrs
Orissa
24 hrs.
–
West Bengal
Average about 23 hrs
* Data not furnished for current month.
Transmission lines (prog & achiv) February 2012
Fig. in ckt Kms
Voltage
Level/Sector
Programme 2011-12
Feb 2012 Apr 2011-Feb 2012
Prog. Achv. Prog. Achv.
+/- 800 kV HVDC
Central Sector 0 0 0 0 0
State Sector 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 0 0 0 0
+/- 500 kV HVDC
Central Sector 0 0 0 0 0
JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 0 0 0 0
765 kV
Central Sector 822 0 740 13 1096
State Sector 2 0 0 2 1
Total 824 0 740 15 1097
400 kV
Central Sector 6762 928 970 6935 7130
State Sector 2626 0 245 2346 1578
JV/Private Sector 3013 0 0 3037 988
Total 12401 928 1215 12318 9896
220kV
Central Sector 575 0 0 575 155
State Sector 5992 0 505 5982 4122
JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 2
Total 6567 0 505 6557 4279
Grand Total 19792 928 2460 18890 15072
Source: Central Electricity Authority
Sub-Stations (Prog & Achiv) February 2012
Fig. in MVA/MW
Voltage
Feb 2012 Apr 2011-Feb 2012
Level/Sector
Programme 2011-12
Prog. Achv. Prog. Achv.
+/- 500 kV HVDC
Central Sector 0 0 0 0 0
State Sector 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 0 0 0 0
765 kV
Central Sector 3315 0 6000 0 9000
State Sector 1000 0 0 1000 0
Total 4315 0 6000 1000 9000
400 kV
Central Sector 2630 0 945 2000 8170
State Sector 5780 0 1890 5235 6650
JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 0
Total 8410 0 2835 7235 14820
220 kV
Central Sector 940 0 0 840 180
State Sector 13715 0 1650 9100 13740
JV/Private Sector 0 0 0 0 127
Total 14655 0 1650 9940 14047
Grand Total 27380 0 10485 18175 37867
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 80 March 2012

Power sector update
Generation capacity addition during 2011-12 (Programme & Achievement)
Sl.
No.
Unit Name Unit No. State Company Type
Capacity (MW)
Commissioning Schedule
Prog. Ach. As per Prog. Actual (A)
1st Quarter (April - June 2011)
CENTRAL SECTOR
1 Koderma # 1 Jharkhand DVC TH 500.00 500.00 June, 11 20.07.11 (A)
STATE SECTOR
2 Priyadarshini Jurala 6 AP APGENCO HY 39.00 39.00 June,11 09.06.11(A)
3 Myntdu 1 Meghalaya MeECL HY 42.00 42.00 June,11 23.11.11(A)
4 Khaperkheda TPS Expn # 5 Maharashtra MSPGCL TH 500.00 500.00 June,11 05.08.11(A)
5 Kothagudem TPP - VI 11 A.P. APGENCO TH 500.00 500.00 June,11 26.06.11(A)
Private SECTOR
6
1 H.P. Everest PPL HY 50.00 50.00 May,11 06.08.11(A)
Malana-II
7 2 H.P. Everest PPL HY 50.00 50.00 June,11 14.08.11(A)
8 Karcham Wangtoo 1 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 May,11 24-05-11(A)
9 JSW Ratnagiri TPP # 3 Maharashtra JSW Energy (Ratnagiri) ltd TH 300.00 300.00 May,11 06-05-11 (A)
10 Maithon RB TPP # 1 Jharkhand DVC- Tata JV TH 525.00 525.00 June,11 30.06.11 (A)
11 Udupi TPP # 2 Karnatka UPCL TH 600.00 600.00 April, 11 17-04-11 (A)
12 Wardha Warora @ 4 Maharashtra Wardha Power Co. Ltd (KSK) TH 135.00 135.00 April, 11 30-04-11 (A)
Sub Total 3491.00 3491.00
IInd Quarter (July - September 2011)
CENTRAL SECTOR
13
1 H.P. NHPC HY 77.00 Aug,11
Chamera-III
14 2 H.P. NHPC HY 77.00 Sep,11
15 Sipat -1 * 1 C.G. NTPC TH 660.00 660.00 July,11 28.06.11 (A)
16 Durgapur Steel TPS # 1 WB DVC TH 500.00 500.00 Aug,11 29.07.11 (A)
State Sector
17 Myntdu 2 Meghalaya MeECL HY 42.00 July,11
18 Harduaganj Extn # 8 UP UPRVUNL TH 250.00 250.00 Sep,11 27.09.11(A)
19 Bhusawal TPS Expn # 4 Maharashtra MSPGCL TH 500.00 July,11
20 Santaldih TPP Extn Ph-II # 6 WB WBPDCL TH 250.00 250.00 July,11 29.06.11(A)
21 Hazira CCPP Extn # GT+ST Gujarat GSECL GT+ST 351.00 Aug,11 18.2.12(A)
22 Pragati CCGT- III # GT-3 Delhi PPCL GT-3 250.00 Sep,11
Private Sector
23
2 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 July,11 21.06.11(A)
Karcham Wangtoo
24 3 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 Aug,11 08.09.11(A)
25 Jallipa-Kapurdi TPP # 3 Rajasthan Raj West Power ltd TH 135.00 135.00 Aug,11 02.11.11(A)
26 Anpara-C TPS # 1 UP Lanco Anpara Power Pvt. Ltd TH 600.00 600.00 July,11 15.11.11(A)
27 Mundra UM TPP 1 Gujarat Tata Power Ltd TH 800.00 Aug,11
28 Mundra TPP Ph-II 2 Gujarat Adani Power Ltd TH 660.00 660.00 Aug,11 20.07.11 (A)
Sub Total 5652.00 3906.00
IIIrd Quarter (October - December 2011)
CENTRAL SECTOR
29
1 J&K NHPC HY 11 Oct,11
30 2 J&K NHPC HY 11 Nov,11
Chutak
31 3 J&K NHPC HY 11 Nov,11
32 4 J&K NHPC HY 11 Dec,11
33 Koteshwar 3 Uttranchal THDC HY 100.00 Nov,11
34 Chamera-III 1 HP NHPC HY 77.00 Oct,11
35
1 J&K NHPC HY 60.00 Nov,11
Uri-II
36 2 J&K NHPC HY 60.00 Dec,11
COAL INSIGHTS 81 March 2012

Power sector update
Generation capacity addition during 2011-12 (contd.)
Sl.
No.
Unit Name Unit No. State Company Type
37 Indra Gandhi TPP 2 Haryana APCPL TH 500.00 500.00 Nov,11 05.11.11(A)
38 Sipat -2* 1 C.G. NTPC TH 660.00 600.00 Nov,11 24.12.11(A)
39 Neyveli TPS Exp # 1 T.N. NLC TH 250.00 250.00 Oct,11 04.02.12(A)
State Sector
40 Bellary TPP St-II 2 Karnatka KPCL TH 500.00 Nov,11
41 Pragati CCGT- III ST-1 # ST-1 Delhi PPCL ST-1 250.00 Oct,11
Private Sector
42
1 HP LANCO HY 35.00 Oct,11
Budhil
43 2 HP LANCO HY 35.00 Nov,11
44 Karcham Wangtoo 4 H.P. JKHCL HY 250.00 250.00 Oct,11 13.09.11(A)
45 JSW Ratnagiri TPP # 4 Maharashtra JSW Energy (Ratnagiri) ltd TH 300.00 300.00 Oct,11 08.10.11(A)
46 Anpara-C TPS # 2 UP Lanco Anpara Power Pvt. Ltd. TH 600.00 600.00 Oct,11 12.11.11(A)
47 Sterlite (Jharsugda)* 3 Orissa Sterlite Energy Ltd. TH 600.00 600.00 Oct,11 16.08.11(A)
48 Rithala CCPP ST Delhi NDPL TH 36.50 04.09.11 (A)
49 Khamberkhera IPP 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 45.00 17.10.11(A)
50 Jallipa-KapurdiTPP # 4 Rajasthan Raj West Power Ltd. TH 135.00 Aug11 23.11.11(A)
51 Maqssodpur IPP 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Ltd. TH 45.00 03.11.11(A)
52 Barkhera TPP 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Ltd. TH 45.00 06.11.11(A)
53 Mundra TPP Ph-II 1 Gujrat Adani Power ltd. TH 660.00 07.11.11(A)
54 Khamberkhera IPP 2 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. Th 45.00 28.11.11(A)
55 Kasaipalli 1 C.G. ACB India Ltd. TH 135.00 13.12.11(A)
56 SVL 1 C.G. SV Power Ltd. TH 63.00 07.12.11(A)
57 Rosa 3 U.P. Rosa Power Co. Ltd. TH 300.00 28.12.11(A)
Sub Total 4321.00 4669.50
IVth Quarter (January - March 2012)
CENTRAL SECTOR
58
1 TN NPC Nucl. 1000.00 Feb,12
Kudankulam
59 2 TN NPC Nucl. 1000.00 Feb12
60 Uri-II 3 J&K NHPC HY 60.00 Jan,12
61 Koteshwar 4 Uttranchal THDC HY 100.00 100.00 Mar,12 25.01.12(A)
State Sector
62 Myntdu 3 Meghalaya MeECL HY 42.00 Feb,12
63 Harduaganj Extn # 9 UP UPRVUNL TH 250.00 Feb,12
64 Bhusawal TPS Expn 5 Maharashtra MSPGCL TH 500.00 Jan,12
65 Maithon RB TPP 2 Jharkhand JV of DVC-Tata TH 525.00 Jan,12
66 Tirora TPP Ph-1 1 Maharashtra Adani Power Ltd. TH 660.00 Jan,12
67 Maqsoodpur IPP 2 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt, Ltd TH 45.00 21.01.12(A)
68 Barkhera TPP 2 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt, Ltd TH 45.00 28.01.12(A)
69 Kundarki 1 U.P. Bajaj Energy Pvt, Ltd TH 45.00 10.01.12(A)
70 Mahatma Gandhi TPP 1 Haryana Jhajjar Power Ltd. TH 660.00 12.01.12(A)
Private Sector
Capacity (MW)
71 Mihan TPP 1 to 4 Maharashtra Abhijeet MADC Enegy Pvt. Ltd. TH 246.00 09.02.12(A)
72 Katghora TPP 1 C. G. Vandna Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 35.00 14.01.12 (A)
73 Utraula TPP 1 U. P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 45.00 21.02.12 (A)
74 Kunderki TPP 2 U. P. Bajaj Energy Pvt. Ltd. TH 45.00 29.02.12(A)
Sub Total 4137.00 1266.00
Grand Total 17601.00 13332.50
Commissioning Schedule
Prog. Ach. As per Prog. Actual (A)
Note : * - 11th Plan Best effort Units; # - Units slipped from 2010-11 Target; @ - Additional Units not included in 11th Plan Target
Source: Central Electricity Authority
COAL INSIGHTS 82 March 2012

E-Auction
Monthly Data of Offered Quantity through
coaljunction and MSTC (Road & Rail)
Monthwise Quantity Offered & Sold through
coaljunction & MSTC E-Auction
Qty. In Tons
MONTH OFFERED QTY (in tons) SOLD QTY (in tons) Variation (In Percent)
Jan'11 3,319,686 2,608,551 -21.42
Feb'11 3,562,770 2,805,310 -21.26
Mar'11 3,249,800 2,481,981 -23.63
Apr'11 2,834,160 2,179,060 -23.11
May'11 2,838,672 2,328,720 -17.96
June'11 1,860,004 1,303,176 -29.94
July'11 2,512,015 2,255,313 -10.22
Aug'11 2,183,370 1,764,911 -19.17
Sept'11 2,578,082 2,203,438 -14.53
Oct'11 591,910 385,904 -34.8
Nov'11 3,309,434 2,891,019 -12.64
Dec'11 2,926,557 2,632,049 -10.06
Jan'12 4,771,008 3,758,496 -21.22
Companywise Data of Sold Quantity through
coaljunction & MSTC in Jan’12 (Road & Rail) Qty. In Tons
SUBSIDIARY NAME RAIL ROAD Grand Total
BCCL - 234,000 234,000
MCL 237,000 1,124,080 1,124,080
NCL - 180,960 180,960
SCCL - 216,996 216,996
SECL - 1,249,250 1,249,250
WCL - 516,210 516,210
Grand Total 237,000 3,521,496 3,758,496
Qty. In Tons
MONTH OFFERED BY ROAD OFFERED BY RAIL
Jan'11 2,991,320 328,366
Feb'11 2,824,250 738,520
Mar'11 2,922,850 326,950
Apr'11 2,466,770 367,390
May'11 2,564,788 273,884
June'11 1,724,469 135,535
July'11 2,236,945 275,070
Aug'11 2,091,330 92,040
Sept'11 2,262,732 315,350
Oct'11 512,850 79,060
Nov'11 3,083,582 225,852
Dec'11 2,706,157 220,400
Jan'12 4,518,196 252,812
Companywise Quantity Offered & Sold Through
coaljunction & MSTC in January’12 Vs December’11
Via Rail & Road
Qty. In Tons
QTY
OFFERED
Jan'12 Dec-11 Variation (In Percent)
QTY SOLD
QTY
OFFERED
QTY SOLD
OFFERED
QTY
SOLD QTY
BCCL ROAD 401,496 234,000 174,000 133,050 130.74% 75.87%
BCCL RAIL 15,812 0 39,500 39,500 -59.97% -100.00%
MCL ROAD 1,533,000 1,124,080 723,000 544,300 112.03% 106.52%
MCL RAIL 237,000 237,000 - - NA NA
NCL ROAD 181,000 180,960 75,000 75,000 141.33% 141.28%
NCL RAIL - - - - NA NA
NEC ROAD - - - - NA NA
NEC RAIL - - 27500 27500 NA NA
SECL ROAD 1,454,650 1,249,250 731,750 715,800 98.79% 74.53%
SECL RAIL - - - - NA NA
ECL ROAD - - 75,607 51,180 NA NA
ECL RAIL - - 153,400 153,400 NA NA
WCL ROAD 731,050 516,210 469,200 469,160 55.81% 10.03%
WCL RAIL - - - - NA NA
SCCL ROAD 217,000 216,996 125,000 121,339 73.60% 78.83%
SCCL RAIL - - - - NA NA
CCL ROAD - - 332,600 301,820 NA NA
CCL RAIL - - - - NA NA
TOTAL 4,771,008 3,758,496 2,926,557 2,632,049 63.02% 42.80%
Qty Offered In Tons
Quantity in Tons
Monthly Data of Offered Quantity
Through coaljunction & MSTC (Road & Rail)
5,000,000
4,500,000
4,000,000
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
Apr'11
Apr'11
May'11
May'11
June'11
July'11
Aug'11
OFFERED BY ROAD
June'11
July'11
Aug'11
OFFERED QTY (in tons)
Sept'11
Oct'11
Nov'11
OFFERED BY RAIL
Quantity Offered & Sold through coaljunction & MSTC
Quantity In Tons
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
BCCL ROAD
BCCL RAIL
MCL ROAD
MCL RAIL
NCL ROAD
NCL RAIL
NEC ROAD
NEC RAIL
SECL ROAD
Sept'11
Oct'11
Nov'11
Dec'11
SOLD QTY (in tons)
Companywise Quantity Offered & Sold Through
coaljunction & MSTC In Jan’12 Vs Dec’11
Quantity (in Tons)
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
Dec'11
Jan'12
Jan'12
SECL RAIL
ECL ROAD
ECL RAIL
WCL ROAD
WCL RAIL
SCCL ROAD
SCCL RAIL
CCL ROAD
CCL RAIL
Companies
Jan'12 QTY OFFERED Jan'12 QTY SOLD Dec-11 QTY OFFERED Dec-11 QTY SOLD
Companywise Data of Sold Quantity Through
coaljunction & MSTC in Jan’12 (Road & Rail)
BCCL MCL NCL SCCL SECL WCL
SUBSIDIARY NAME
RAIL ROAD
NOTE : Data for the period January 2011 - December 2011 is for e-auction through coaljuntion only, while data for January 2012 inculdes MSTC
COAL INSIGHTS 84 March 2012

port data
Major Ports through which Coking Coal
Arrived in India Nov’11-Jan’12
Port
Qty (in Tons)
VIZAG 2695331
PARADIP 1401399
KOLKATA 1304378
MORMUGAO 1085788
MUNDRA 378523
NEW MANGALORE 158576
KANDLA 82000
CHENNAI 523
Grand Total 7106519
Major Ports through which Coking Coal
Arrived in India Nov’11-Jan’12
15%
5% 2%
1%
0%
39%
Major Coking Coal Supplier Countries to India
(through Mentioned Ports) Nov’11-Jan’12
Country of Origin
Qty (in Tons)
AUSTRALIA 5641536
UNITED STATES 804109
NEW ZEALAND 252120
SOUTH AFRICA 236829
OTHERS 171925
Grand Total 7106519
Major Coking Coal Supplier Countries to India
(through Mentioned Ports) - Nov’11-Jan’12
11%
4%
3% 2%
18%
20%
VIZAG PARADIP KOLKATA
MORMUGAO MUNDRA NEW MANGALORE
KANDLA
CHENNAI
80%
AUSTRALIA UNITED STATES NEW ZEALAND
SOUTH AFRICA OTHERS
Major Ports Through Which Steam Coal Arrived in
India Nov’11-Jan’12
Port
Qty (in Tons)
VIZAG 1993538
MUNDRA 1869395
MUMBAI 1570756
PARADIP 1095886
NEW MANGALORE 961045
Major Ports through Which Steam Coal
8%
8%
8%
8%
Arrived 5% in India Nov’11-Jan’12
6%
5% 1%
KANDLA 761941
KOLKATA 525591
MORMUGAO 508652
OTHERS 63526
Grand Total 9350329
21%
27%
Major Steam Coal Supplier Countries to India
(through Mentioned Ports) Nov’11-Jan’12
Major Steam Coal Supplier Countries to India
(through Mentioned Ports) - Nov’11-Jan’12
20%
Country of Origin
3%
Qty (in Tons)
INDONESIA 7206846
SOUTH AFRICA 1884521
AUSTRALIA 258962
Grand Total 9350329
10%
11%
12%
12%
17%
20% 21%
VIZAG KANDLA MUNDRA MUMBAI PARADIP MUMBAI CHENNAI MUNDRA VIZAG KOLKATA OTHERS
PARADIP NEW MANGALORE KANDLA
KOLKATA MORMUGAO OTHERS
INDONESIA SOUTH AFRICA AUSTRALIA
Note: Name of importers for coal and coke will be provided on request. Figures are based on consignment lifted from these ports for which price
details/break-up is available with Coal Insights team
77%
COAL INSIGHTS 85 March 2012

COAL INSIGHTS 86 March 2012
Tear along the dotted line Tear along the dotted line