DOCSLIB.ORG

2013 Annual Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2013 Annual Report 2013 Annual Report E.ON Group Financial Highlights € in millions 2013 2012 +/- % Attributable generation (MW) 61,090 67,622 -10 – thereof renewables (MW) 10,885 10,171 +7 Fully consolidated generation (MW) 62,809 70,209 -11 – thereof renewables (MW) 10,414 10,025 +4 Owned generation (billion kWh) 245.2 263.1 -7 – thereof renewables (billion kWh) 30.8 30.2 +2 Carbon emissions from power and heat production (million metric tons) 114.3 125.8 -9 Specific carbon emissions (metric tons of CO2 per MWh) 0.45 0.46 -2 Electricity sales (billion kWh) 704.4 740.9 -5 Gas sales (billion kWh) 1,091.7 1,162.1 -6 Sales 122,450 132,093 -7 EBITDA1 9,315 10,771 -14 EBIT1 5,681 7,012 -19 Net income 2,510 2,613 -4 Net income attributable to shareholders of E.ON SE 2,142 2,189 -2 Underlying net income1 2,243 4,170 -46 Investments 8,086 6,997 +16 Expenditures on technology and innovation (including software) 130 161 -19 Cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations 6,375 8,808 -28 Economic net debt (at year-end) 31,991 35,845 -11 Debt factor3 3.4 3.3 +0.12 Equity 36,385 38,820 -6 Total assets 130,725 140,426 -7 ROACE (%) 9.2 11.1 -1.94 Pretax cost of capital (%) 7.5 7.7 -0.24 After-tax cost of capital (%) 5.5 5.6 -0.14 Value added 1,066 2,139 –50 Employees (at year-end) 62,239 72,083 -14 – Percentage of female employees 28.6 28.4 +0.24 – Percentage of female executives and senior managers 14.0 12.9 +1.14 – Average employee turnover (%) 3.5 3.6 -0.14 – Average age of employees 43 42 +12 – TRIF (E.ON employees) 2.6 2.6 – Earnings per share5, 6 (€) 1.12 1.15 -3 Equity per share5, 6 (€) 17.54 18.33 -4 Dividend per share7 (€) 0.60 1.10 -45 Dividend payout 1,145 2,097 -45 Market capitalization6 (€ in billions) 25.6 26.9 -5 1Adjusted for extraordinary effects (see Glossary). 2Change in absolute terms. 3Ratio of economic net debt and EBITDA. 4Change in percentage points. 5Attributable to shareholders of E.ON SE. 6Based on shares outstanding. 7For the respective financial year; the 2013 figure is management’s proposed dividend. CEO Letter Contents Report of the Supervisory Board E.ON Stock Strategy and Objectives Combined Group Management Report Consolidated Financial Statements Supervisory Board and Board of Management Tables and Explanations 2 CEO Letter 4 Report of the Supervisory Board 10 E.ON Stock 12 Strategy and Objectives 18 Combined Group Management Report 18 Corporate Profile 18 Business Model 20 Management System 21 Technology and Innovation 24 Business Report 24 Macroeconomic and Industry Environment 30 Business Performance 35 Earnings Situation 43 Financial Situation 47 Asset Situation 48 E.ON SE’s Earnings, Financial, and Asset Situation 49 Financial and Non-financial Performance Indicators 49 – ROACE and Value Added 50 – Corporate Sustainability 52 – Employees 56 Subsequent Events Report 56 Forecast Report 60 Risk Report 69 Opportunity Report 70 Internal Control System for the Accounting Process 72 Disclosures Regarding Takeovers 75 Corporate Governance Report 75 Corporate Governance Declaration 81 Compensation Report 93 Declaration of the Board of Management 94 Consolidated Financial Statements 94 Independent Auditors’ Report 96 Consolidated Statements of Income 97 Consolidated Statements of Recognized Income and Expenses 98 Consolidated Balance Sheets 100 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 102 Statement of Changes in Equity 104 Notes 208 Supervisory Board and Board of Management 208 Members of the Supervisory Board 210 Members of the Board of Management 211 Tables and Explanations 211 Explanatory Report of the Board of Management 212 Summary of Financial Highlights/Capacities/Energy Volumes 216 Glossary of Financial Terms 221 Financial Calendar 2 CEO Letter In 2013 we again had to navigate difficult terrain. Although we were able to finish the financial year with results that were in line with our expectations, these results nevertheless reflect the considerable adverse impact of our business and regulatory environment. Our EBITDA declined by 14 percent year on year to €9.3 billion. It was inside our forecast range, as was our underlying net income of €2.2 billion. Our underlying income per share was about €1.18. In April we’ll therefore recommend to the Annual Shareholders Meeting that E.ON pay out a dividend of €0.60 per share. This would be a payout ratio of 51 percent of our underlying net income, which is likewise inside the range we’ve communicated for several years. Taking a sober view of what lies ahead, there are few indications that our market environment will rapidly or tangibly improve. We recognized early that the magnitude of the persistent dislocations couldn’t be counteracted overnight. That’s why we launched our E.ON 2.0 program back in 2011. Its purpose is to achieve lasting cost reductions across our company and to tangibly improve our efficiency. It gives me great satisfaction to report to you that E.ON 2.0 is right on schedule. By the end of 2014 we’ll have initiated and largely completed most of its main measures. We will achieve our goal of lowering our controllable costs to €8.2 billion by 2015 at the latest. We reduced E.ON’s workforce by 7,700 employees by the end of 2013. In consultation with trade unions and works councils, we put in place numerous measures so that staff reductions were implemented in a socially responsible manner. Our focus is increasingly on using the broad momentum from this program to establish a performance culture in which we continually achieve enduring improvements in our cost structure. We’re making good progress in this area as well and have identified further potential cost reductions beyond those targeted by E.ON 2.0. Market dislocations and interventionist government policies have had a particularly severe impact on our conventional generation business in Europe. That’s why improving the profitability of this part of our operating business was very high on our agenda in 2013. Our primary focus is on maintaining our commercial flexibility in this area as well. To this end, we continually and carefully scrutinize the profitability of each one of our assets. As a result, we’ve decided to decommission nearly 13 GW of capacity. That’s more than one fourth of our entire conventional fleet in Europe. But the situation will get increasingly out of balance if, for economic reasons, we shut down power plants that are actually urgently needed to ensure supply security. For a number of our power plants, we’ve found solutions with the local system operator that, for the time being, ensure supply security and render the provision of this generating capacity economically viable. Policymakers are discussing other measures such as fair rules for providing generating capacity and incentives for the construction of new capacity. All are urgently needed. Generating capacity—and providing this capacity to ensure supply security—needs to again pay returns. Together with executives from other multinational companies, I’ve lobbied on a European level for a rapid and comprehensive reform of the market design for power generation, particularly the introduction of a capacity mechanism and the reform of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. The decision to implement back-loading is a first step in the right direction. Alongside our extensive efforts in our operating business, we further optimized our portfolio as well. We’ve now generated about €20 billion from the sale of noncore assets, thereby surpassing our original target of €15 billion by a wide margin. Our successful divestments not only give us financial flexibility. They also allow us to sharpen our focus on the challenges and opportunities in our core businesses. Despite all these efforts, we know that in the next few years as well our business will only generate limited funds for new investments. Relative to 2013 our investments in subsequent years will be significantly lower. Alongside necessary maintenance and network investments, we’ll focus in particular on expanding our growth businesses like renewables and distributed-energy solutions. With more than 5 GW of installed wind and solar capacity, we already rank among the world’s leading renewables companies. But renewables are more than just a significant component of our generation portfolio. After just seven years of focused growth, they’re above all a mainstay of our earnings. Our industrial-scale approach from development to maintenance makes our wind fleet one of the most reliable and profitable in the industry. The addition, in 2013, of London Array and Kårehamn offshore wind farms—which we delivered on time and on budget—made our wind fleet even stronger. Amrumbank West offshore wind farm is currently under construction. When this project is completed, our wind fleet will make a reliable contribution to the CEO Letter Report of the Supervisory Board 3 E.ON Stock Strategy and Objectives Combined Group Management Report Consolidated Financial Statements Supervisory Board and Board of Management Tables and Explanations transformation of Germany’s energy system as well. Our operational excellence enables us to also be successful at taking new approaches to unlocking capital. For example, we found investors—Pension Danmark and Danish energy utility SEAS-NVE—who bought stakes in wind farms in the United States and Rødsand 2 offshore wind farm and entrust us with their operation. This innovative form of capital rotation enables us to unlock invested capital more rapidly and to create additional value by investing it to deliver other wind and solar projects in our superb development pipeline.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • *** DRAFT ** Sustainable Development and CO2 Capture and Storage
    *** DRAFT ** Sustainable Development and CO2 Capture and Storage A report for UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Prepared by Dr Paul Freund 31 August 2007 Executive Summary The threat of climate change and the importance of fossil fuels in global energy supply have recently stimulated much interest in CO2 capture and storage (CCS). The most important application of CO2 capture would be in power generation, the sector which is responsible for 75% of global CO2 emissions from large stationary industrial sources. Two options for capture are based on well established technology - post-combustion capture using chemical solvent scrubbing would be used in current designs of power stations; pre-combustion capture using physical solvent separation involves a small modification to the design of gasification based systems which are increasingly being considered for future power plants. A third approach, oxyfuel combustion, has not yet been demonstrated at full scale but several pilot plants are under construction. Captured CO2 would be transported by pipeline to storage in geological formations – this might be in disused oil or gas fields or in deep saline aquifers. Use of the CO2 to enhance oil or gas production offers the possibility of generating some income to offset part of the cost of CCS. CCS increases the energy used for power generation by about 25-50% and reduces emissions by about 85%. The levelized cost of electricity generation would be increased by between 40% and 90% depending on the design of the plant and type of fuel. There is sufficient capacity worldwide for CO2 storage to make a substantial contribution to reducing global emissions, although the capacity is not distributed evenly.
    [Show full text]
  • Bundesverwaltungsgericht Beschluss
    BUNDESVERWALTUNGSGERICHT BESCHLUSS BVerwG 9 VR 15.04 In der Verwaltungsstreitsache - 2 - hat der 9. Senat des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts am 7. Februar 2005 durch den Vorsitzenden Richter am Bundesverwaltungsgericht Dr. S t o r o s t und die Richter am Bundesverwaltungsgericht Dr. N o l t e und D o m g ö r g e n beschlossen: Der Antrag auf Anordnung der aufschiebenden Wirkung der Klage der Antragstellerin gegen die Plangenehmigung des Ei- senbahn-Bundesamtes vom 11. Mai 2004 wird abgelehnt. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten des Verfahrens. Außerge- richtliche Kosten der Beigeladenen werden nicht erstattet. Der Wert des Streitgegenstandes wird auf 25 000 € festgesetzt. G r ü n d e : I. Die Antragstellerin begehrt die Anordnung der aufschiebenden Wirkung ihrer An- fechtungsklage gegen die Plangenehmigung des Eisenbahn-Bundesamtes vom 11. Mai 2004 für die Erneuerung der Personenverkehrsanlagen im Haltepunkt Miltzow der Strecke Berlin-Gesundbrunnen - Eberswalde - Stralsund. Die Bahnstrecke quert das Gebiet der Antragstellerin von Südosten nach Nordwes- ten. In Bahn-km 226,073 kreuzt sie höhengleich die von Südwesten nach Nordosten verlaufende Landesstraße L 30, die die südwestlich der Bahn gelegenen Ortsteile Klein Miltzow und Reinkenhagen der Antragstellerin mit deren nordöstlich der Bahn gelegenen Ortsteilen Neu Miltzow und Hankenhagen verbindet. Der Haltepunkt mit dem heute nicht mehr genutzten Bahnhofsgebäude befindet sich ca. 200 m südöst- lich des Bahnübergangs. Die Planung für die Erneuerung der Personenverkehrsanlagen im Haltepunkt Miltzow steht im Zusammenhang mit dem Projekt der DB Netz AG, die Bahnstrecke mit elektronischer Stellwerkstechnik auszurüsten. Im Zuge der Errichtung des elektroni- schen Stellwerks Anklam sollen im Bereich von Miltzow Gleisanlagen verändert und - 3 - der durch Halbschranken gesicherte Bahnübergang über die L 30 an die neue Tech- nik sowie die geänderten Gleise angepasst werden.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Information Report Section 36 Consent Variation
    ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT SECTION 36 CONSENT VARIATION DAMHEAD CREEK 2 POWER STATION Name Job Title Signature Date Environmental John Bacon / Consultant / February Prepared Associate Director, 2016 Andrew Hepworth Aecom Technical Technical Director, February Kerry Whalley Review Aecom 2016 February Approved Richard Lowe Director, Aecom 2016 AMENDMENT RECORD Issue Date Issued Date Effective Purpose of Issue and Description of Amendment 1.0 January 2016 January 2016 S36 Variation Draft EIR for review 2.0 February 2016 February 2016 S36 Variation Final for Issue DHC2 Environmental Information Report 4-Feb-16 Page 2 of 116 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 9 1.1 Purpose of this Document 10 1.2 Planning history of DHC2 10 1.3 Environmental Assessment 11 2. Description of the Development 15 2.1 Proposed Development 15 2.2 Site Location 16 2.3 Application Site Context 17 2.4 Main Buildings and Plant 18 2.5 Process Description 19 2.6 Operational Information 21 2.7 Environmental Permit 22 2.8 Combined Heat and Power (CHP) 23 3. Legislative Framework 26 4. Status of Pre Commencement Planning Conditions 27 4.1 Operational Noise 27 4.2 Contamination of Watercourses 27 4.3 Ecological Enhancement and Protected Species 27 4.4 Ground Contamination 28 4.5 Landscaping and Creative Conservation 28 4.6 Archaeology 29 4.7 Layout and Design 29 4.8 Green Travel Plan 29 4.9 Construction and Construction Traffic 30 4.8 Other Planning Conditions 30 4.8 Other Planning Consents 30 5. Stakeholder Consultation 31 6. Environmental Appraisal 33 6.1 Methodology 33 6.2 Air Quality 35 6.3 Noise and Vibration 42 6.4 Landscape and Visual Amenity 48 6.5 Ecology 61 6.6 Water Quality 75 6.7 Geology, Hydrology and Land Contamination 82 6.8 Traffic and Infrastructure 93 6.9 Cultural Heritage 98 6.10 Socio-Economics 104 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Gemeinde Süderholz
    Poggendorf 27.01.2003 8:32 Uhr Seite U1 in den Ämtern Kronskamp und Miltzow und in der Gemeinde Süderholz BAUEN UND WOHNEN Poggendorf 27.01.2003 8:32 Uhr Seite U2 INHALTSVERZEICHNIS Seite Grußwort . 1 Amt Kronskamp Grußwort . 2 Geschichte Amt Kronskamp . 3 Wichtige Rufnummer der Verwaltung . 3 Wichtige Rufnummern und Adressen . 4 Amtsangehörige Gemeinden u. ihre jeweiligen Ortsteile . 5 Freizeitangebote und Vereine . 6, 7 Aktuelle Baugebiete . 7 Amt Miltzow Der Amtsbereich . 8, 9, 11 Ansprechpartner im Amt . .12 Das Gewerbegebiet Miltzow . .13 Belegung der Parzellen . .13 Steuereinnahmen, Finanzausgleich, Umlage . .14 Gemeinde Süderholz Grußwort . 15 Gemeindeverwaltung: Anschrift und Sprechzeiten . 15 Bebauungsmöglichkeiten . 16, 17 Gewerbegebiet „Am Sportplatz“ in Kandelin . 18 Gewerbestandort Pommerndreieck . 20 Flächendaten . 20 Belegungsplan – Baugebiet „Am Wührweg” in Neuendorf . .22 Planen und Bauen von A bis Z . .23, 24, 25, 26, 27 Impressum . 27 Branchenverzeichnis . 28 Poggendorf 27.01.2003 8:32 Uhr Seite 1 Immer mehr Bürger interessieren sich für das Wohnen im ländlichen Schauen Sie sich um in den Gemeinden und Städten unserer Amtsbe- Bereich auch deshalb, weil sich durch Entwicklung und -sanierung so- reiche und der Gemeinde, lassen Sie sich überzeugen von den gu- wie durch Dorferneuerungsprogramme sehr viel in unseren Kleinstäd- ten und schnellen Verkehrsanbindungen, freuen Sie sich mit unseren ten und im ländlichen Bereich getan hat und immer mehr geschieht. Jüngsten über die vielen Kindereinrichtungen und Schulstandorte –
    [Show full text]
  • Medway Local Development Framework
    ATTACHMENT 9 Medway Local Development Framework Statement of Community Involvement January 2012 1 2 Summary This document is a new revised version of the Statement of Community Involvement or SCI for Medway. It sets out how the Council will involve local people in planning and development issues affecting Medway. The Council adopted its original SCI in 2006. Since then there have been further changes to the development planning system and consultation bodies have come and gone. For these reasons it is appropriate to update and refresh it now. It includes a short description of the development planning system and Medway Council’s role. However most of the document describes the methods the Council will use to engage with the public and other stakeholders and it lists the main organisations that have expressed an interest in being involved. Getting involved: There are a number of ways in which you can give us your views, check progress on the preparation of this and other LDF Documents and get involved in planning and development issues: • Telephone: 01634 331629 (Office hours are 9 a.m. – 5 p.m. Monday to Thursday and 9 a.m. – 4.30 p.m. Friday) • Email: [email protected] • Post: Development Policy and Engagement Team, Regeneration, Community and Culture, Medway Council, Gun Wharf, Dock Road, Chatham, Kent ME4 4TR • Website: http://www.medway.gov.uk/ldf . This is our front page and you will find numerous links to published documents, our Limehouse system etc. • Limehouse: This is an online consultation system and we would strongly encourage you to “register” as a user.
    [Show full text]
  • Core Vision November 2009
    The Thames Gateway Core Vision November 2009 Sir Terry Farrell The purpose of the Core Vision… The Core The Core The Core Vision: Vision: Vision: ● to develop a visual ● refreshes the ● supports characterisation Thames Gateway investment plans (based on the narrative Parklands Model) ● helps inform ● shapes the future policy delivery strategy ● supports project delivery ● commissioned by the HCA / CLG The key questions… • What is the Thames Gateway’s role and what is its future? • Why should Government continue to support the Thames Gateway? Wealth and quality of life is place-based “Place is actually more important to the world economy than ever before …” Richard Florida London’s wealth enables the Greater South East to compete globally Growth in London and the Greater South East is critical to the UK’s future prosperity 1 The highest return on investment for public and private sectors in the UK 2 The highest GVA per capita in the UK £30k £20k £10k East of England Rest of UK South East £0k London Table comparing GVA per capita in the UK Thames Gateway has the region’s greatest potential… The largest designated The most available land and a 1 growth area in the region 2 willingness for sustainable growth 1 Milton Keynes and South Midlands Basildon 2 London Stansted and Cambridge East London 3 Thames Gateway Kent 4 Ashford Thameside Medway ● Immediately adjacent to London ● 20% of the Greater South East’s brownfield land ● A critical part of the London economy – London’s engine ● in only 3% of the Greater South room East Region …to deliver
    [Show full text]
  • Local. International
    Andrew Annual Report Part I/II 2008 Company Report Laura Jacob Local. International. Peter 2008 Company Report E.ON Olga Eric Sarah Michael Lewis Sven Monica Financial Calendar Dimitrii May 6, 2009 2009 Annual Shareholders Meeting May 7, 2009 Dividend Payout May 13, 2009 Interim Report: January – March 2009 August 12, 2009 Interim Report: January – June 2009 November 11, 2009 Interim Report: January – September 2009 March 10, 2010 Release of 2009 Annual Report Isabelle May 6, 2010 2010 Annual Shareholders Meeting May 7, 2010 Dividend Payout May 11, 2010 Interim Report: January – March 2010 August 11, 2010 Interim Report: January – June 2010 November 10, 2010 Interim Report: January – September 2010 International. It sounds far away. Big. Impersonal. Unreachable. Actually, the opposite is true. International is everywhere. In Madrid and in Düsseldorf. Off the coast of Scotland. In Malmö. In Datteln. In Bratislava. In Livorno Ferraris. At OGK-4 in Moscow. Why? Because everything we do locally benefi ts from the way we work together across our international organization. Because that’s how we learn from each other, create synergies, and fi nd the best solutions. For the environment. For a reliable and secure supply of energy. For our employees and our investors. But especially for our customers. At E.ON, there are countless examples of this kind of collaboration. Our 2008 Company Report introduces you to a few of them. We want you to see how local international can be. 6 Smart Product Workshop: part of our groupwide Smart Metering Program 11 Employee opinion survey: an important management and communications tool 17 R&D Steering Group meets in the United Kingdom 25 Protective clothing that meets uniform standards 2 Our Company.
    [Show full text]
  • After the Coal Rush:Layout 1.Qxd
    WWW.IPPR.ORG AftertheCoalRush: Assessingpolicyoptionsforcoal-fired electricitygeneration byMatthewLockwood July2008 ©ippr2008 InstituteforPublicPolicyResearch Challengingideas– Changingpolicy 2 ippr|AftertheCoalRush:Assessingpolicyoptionsforcoal-firedelectricitygeneration Contents Aboutippr........................................................................................................................................... 3 Abouttheauthor ................................................................................................................................ 3 Acknowledgements.............................................................................................................................. 3 Abbreviationsandacronyms................................................................................................................ 4 Executivesummary .............................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 10 1.Coal-firedpowergenerationintheUK:anoverview .................................................................... 12 2.Whyenergycompanieswanttobuildnewcoal-firedpowerstations........................................... 15 3.Theroleofcarbonpricing............................................................................................................. 24 4.Theroleofthe2020renewableenergytarget.............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Low Cost Systems for Co-Utilisation of Biomass in Large Power Plant
    DEVELOPMENT OF LOW COST SYSTEMS FOR CO-UTILISATION OF BIOMASS IN LARGE POWER PLANT MID TERM REVIEW REPORT B/U1/00726/00/00 URN 03/1440 Contractor Mitsui Babcock Technology and Engineering Prepared by W R Livingston The work described in this report was carried out under contract as part of the DTI New and Renewable Energy Programme, which is managed by Future Energy Solutions. The views and judgements expressed in this report are those of the contractor and do not necessarily reflect those of the DTI or Future Energy Solutions. First Published 2003 © Crown Copyright 2003 dti EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There has been a fairly dramatic increase over the past two years in the interest in the co­ firing of biomass materials with coal in the large coal-fired power plants in Britain, in response to the significant additional incomes available from the generation of Renewables Obligation Certificates. All of the operators of coal-fired plants have registered with Ofgem, and by the end of 2003, it is anticipated that most, if not all, of the coal-fired power plants in Britain will have the capability to co-fire biomass materials. The major constraint on co-firing activities will be the availability of suitable supplies of biomass materials at acceptable delivered fuel prices. The route to fully commercial operation of a coal-fired station on biomass co-firing involves a number of stages, viz: • The securing of the biomass fuel supply, • The preparation of the application to the Environment Agency/SEPA for a Variation to the Authorisation under Section 11 of the EPA, the definition of the test burn requirements and obtaining agreement to hold the test burn from the EA/SEPA, • The performance and reportage of the test burn, and • The final agreement from the Environment Agency/SEPA on the variation to the Authorisation, and proceeding to commercial operation on co-firing.
    [Show full text]
  • (For Official Use Only) PUBLIC PETITION NO. PE1188 Should You Wish to Submit a Public Petition for Consideration by the Public P
    (For official use only) PUBLIC PETITION NO. PE1188 Should you wish to submit a public petition for consideration by the Public Petitions Committee please refer to the guidance leaflet How to submit a public petition and the Guidance Notes at the back of this form. 1. NAME OF PRINCIPAL PETITIONER Nick Dekker 2. TEXT OF PETITION Nick Dekker calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to investigate the circumstances whereby it agreed that 60 hydro-power stations could be accredited for subsidy under the Renewables Obligation scheme and that generation capacity could be cut to below the 20megawatt qualification threshold at others to enable accreditation and whether, in the interests of electricity consumers, it will rescind these accreditations. 3. ACTION TAKEN TO RESOLVE ISSUES OF CONCERN BEFORE SUBMITTING THE PETITION I have contacted and have been in correspondence with AuditScotland, OFGEM, Scottish & Southern Energy PLC and ScottishPower PLC. Alex Neil MSP also corresponded with Scottish & Southern Energy. 4. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION See— “The war on climate change – A licence to print money?” “Subsidies and Subterfuge – Hydro-power and the Renewables Obligation” (also on www.swap.org.uk) “ROCs earned by Alcan, SSE and ScottishPower from 'old build' hydro, April 2002 to December 2007” (a report by the petitioners); “Renewable Energy Data for Scotland (Hydro), May 2008” Correspondence generally pertinent to the petition but esp to Question 3 OFGEM’s “Annual Reports on the Renewables Obligation” 2004 to 2008; Press releases and other material referred to in “The war on climate change – a licence to print money?” and elsewhere 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniper UK Limited (Formerly E.ON UK) Have Not Undertaken Any Operations in Zone 5 Since the Environmental Permit Was Issued
    Application SCR evaluation template Name of activity, address and NGR Kingsnorth Power Station Hoo PO Box 15 Rochester Kent ME3 9LD Centre of the site is at NG Ref. TQ 8115 7203 Document reference of application SCR Partial Surrender Application for Kingsnorth Power Station 09/12/2019 Ground Investigation Interpretative Report Kingsnorth Power Station On Behalf of E.ON UK Limited Date: May 2014 Ref: JER5486 JER5981 RPS Validation report for Coal Stock 131017 Date and version of application SCR N/A 1.0 Site details Has the applicant provided the following information as required by the application SCR template? Site plans showing site layout, drainage, surfacing, receptors, sources of emissions/releases and monitoring points NA. This is an application for Surrender 2.0 Condition of the land at permit issue To be completed by GWCL officers (Receptor) Has the applicant provided the following information as required by the application SCR template? a) Environmental setting including geology, hydrogeology and surface waters b) Pollution history including: pollution incidents that may have affected land historical land-uses and associated contaminants visual/olfactory evidence of existing contamination evidence of damage to existing pollution prevention measures c) Evidence of historic contamination (i.e. historical site investigation, assessment, remediation and verification reports (where available) d) Has the applicant chosen to collect baseline reference data? Condition of Land at the Point of Permit Issue The environmental setting is
    [Show full text]
  • Sitzung Am: 10.12.2020 Betreff: Übernahme Der Organisationsform Der RS Reinberg (Gebundene ^ Ganztagsschule) an Den Regionalschulteil Des Schulzentrums Sundhagen
    II. Ausfertigung Beschluss - Nr.: /2020 der Gemeindevertretung Sundhagen Sitzung am: 10.12.2020 Betreff: Übernahme der Organisationsform der RS Reinberg (gebundene ^ Ganztagsschule) an den Regionalschulteil des Schulzentrums Sundhagen. Finanzielle Auswirkungen Keine Entspr. Haushaltsplan | | Mehrausgaben Q Höhe: Mindereinnahmen Q Höhe: Deckung aus dem Produkt: Sachkonto: Genehmigungsvermerk der 30.11.2020 Kämmerei (DatumAJnterschrift) Kommunalrechtliche Verfahrensvorschriften: § 44 Abs.4 und § I44 Abs.i Beraten im / vorbereitet durch den Ausschuss der Gemeindevertretung I I Ja, den am: I^Nein Notwendige Mehrheit für den Beschluss: § 31 Abs. 1 KV-MV,d.h. einfache Mehrheit Anlagen zum Beschluss: Nein I I Ja welche: Erläuterungen: Die Schulleitung der Regionalen Schule Reinberg wurde durch das Schulamt Greifswald aufgefordert, eine Organisationsform für den Regionalschultell am Schulzentrum Sundhagen in Abstimmung mit dem Schulträger einzureichen. Die Schulleitung ist zu dem Entschluss gekommen, die derzeit angewandte Organisationsform (gebundene Ganztagsschule) auf den Regionalschulteil des Schulzentrums Sundhagen zu übertragen. II. Ausfertigimg Beschluss-Nr.: /2020 Die Gemeindevertretung der Gemeinde Sundhagen stimmt dem Antrag der Schulleitung der Regionalen Schule Reinberg zur Einrichtung der Organisationsform „gebundene Ganztagsschule" am Schulzentrum Sundhagen zu. Ergänzungen / Änderungen: Einreichendes Fachamt: Hauptamt Datum / Unterschrift: 30.11.2020 / Bearbeitungsvermerke: Eingearbeitet in die Sitzung am: Tagesordnungspunkt: öffentlicher
    [Show full text]