Defence stocks jump: Paras Defence up 6%, Apollo Micro up 2.4%, HAL up 0.6%, GRSE up 1.7% as DAC clears Rs 1.05 lakh crore proposals
Defence stocks were in focus on Friday after the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), chaired by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, approved proposals worth ₹1.05 lakh crore to bolster India's tri-services capabilities through indigenous procurement.
At the time of reporting: Paras Defence and Space Technologies surged nearly 6% , buoyed by its stock split and the sectoral sentiment.
Apollo Micro Systems gained over 2.4% on the BSE.
Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) advanced about 0.6% , reflecting optimism on higher defence orders.
Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers (GRSE) rose about 1.7%, benefiting from revived Navy projects. Stock Price (BSE) Change (%) Paras Defence and Space Tech ₹899.50 +5.97% Apollo Micro Systems ₹192.35 +2.45% Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) ₹4,960.00 +0.60% Garden Reach Shipbuilders (GRSE) ₹2,991.30 +1.68% Bharat Electronics (BEL) ₹431.50 +1.26% Bharat Dynamics (BDL) ₹1,987.70 +1.16% Cochin Shipyard ₹2,046.55 +1.55% Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders ₹3,320.00 +0.99% Data Patterns ₹2,981.50 +0.50% IdeaForge Technology ₹580.85 +1.72%
On Thursday, the DAC accorded 'Acceptance of Necessity' for ten proposals, which include the revival of the ₹44,000 crore Mine Counter Measure Vessel (MCMV) project for the Navy, procurement of Quick Reaction Surface-to-Air Missiles (QRSAMs) for the Army at an estimated ₹30,000 crore, and acquisition of I-STAR aircraft for the Air Force.
These initiatives are expected to enhance mobility, air defence, surveillance and supply chain resilience for the Armed Forces, while also strengthening the government's 'Make in India' agenda through partnerships with players such as BEL, BDL, L&T, and others.
The sentiment was also supported by improving order visibility for the domestic defence sector amid the Ministry of Defence's continued emphasis on indigenous manufacturing.
Ahmedabad Plane Crash
Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Upturn
3 hours ago
- Business Upturn
Reuters X account blocked in India
By Aditya Bhagchandani Published on July 6, 2025, 00:10 IST In a surprising development late Saturday, the official X (formerly Twitter) account of global news agency Reuters (@Reuters) was blocked in India. The account now displays a message saying, '@Reuters has been withheld in IN in response to a legal demand,' as seen by users trying to access it around 11:30 PM IST. Tweets by Reuters The restriction appears to be specific to India, as the account remains accessible from other countries. Additionally, the X account of Reuters World was also found to be inaccessible in India as of 11:40 PM. However, several other affiliated handles — including Reuters Tech News, Reuters Fact Check, Reuters Pictures, Reuters Asia, and Reuters China — continue to function normally in the country. As of now, no official statement has been issued either by Reuters or by X regarding the exact reason for the block. According to X's own guidelines, accounts or posts can be withheld in a specific region if the company receives a valid legal request, such as a court order or a directive from local authorities. The guidelines specify that such actions are typically taken in compliance with local laws. It is currently unclear whether the block is linked to a particular report, legal dispute, or government order. It is also not known whether the restriction is temporary or permanent. The development has already triggered reactions on social media, with users questioning the basis of the move and waiting for more clarity. Ahmedabad Plane Crash Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Power Grid Corp. of India rises Friday, underperforms market
Power Grid Corp. of India Ltd. 532898 shares inched up 0.14% to 294.10 Indian rupees Friday, on what proved to be an all-around favorable trading session for the stock market, with the BSE SENSEX Index 1 rising 0.23% to 83,432.89. Power Grid Corp. of India Ltd. closed 19.69% below its 52-week high of 366.20 rupees, which the company reached on September 25th. Now that the megabill has passed, expect a ton of short-term debt to be sold to finance the government's deficit 'I'm single': At 70, I have $500,000 in stocks and $220,000 in savings. How do I invest my $130,000 windfall? 'Today is my 61st birthday': I have my ex-spouse's Social Security benefits. Should I retire at 65 and travel? 'I do all the yard work, cooking and cleaning': I live with my daughter and her lazy boyfriend. She wants me to buy her house. Do I say yes? My wife and I are in our late 60s. Do I sell stocks to pay our $30,000 credit-card debt — or do it gradually over 3 years? The stock demonstrated a mixed performance when compared to some of its competitors Friday, as Tata Power Co. Ltd. TATAPOWER rose 0.28% and Gujarat Industries Power Co. Ltd. 517300 fell 0.74%. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. JINDALSTEL fell 0.37%. Trading volume totaled 573,674, compared to the 50-day average of 354,312. My wife and I have $7,000 a month in pensions and Social Security, plus $140,000 cash. Can we afford to retire? 'Finance makes me break out in hives': I inherited $240K from my parents. Do I pay off my $258K mortgage and give up my job? The Dow and Russell 2000 are joining the stock market's party. Is it a game changer for the bulls? My job is offering me a payout. Should I take a $61,000 lump sum — or $355 a month for life? We're living in 'end times' when you can't retire on $1 million Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
a day ago
- Forbes
Understanding Carbon Capture - Science Or Shell Game
Sustainable practices for carbon reduction Carbon capture sounds like climate alchemy especially because in the crude sense of the technology, it pulls CO₂ out of thin air, and neutralize decades of emissions. It does present it self as a bold promise, but does it deliver, or distract? Carbon Capture and Storage and Direct Air Capture are the two main pathways under the broader umbrella of Carbon Dioxide Removal. While both aim to reduce atmospheric carbon, they differ significantly in method, scalability, as well as credibility. CCS captures CO₂ directly at the point of emission which is usually from industrial or fossil fuel plants right before it enters the atmosphere. The gas is then compressed and stored underground. While DAC, on the other hand, uses machines to pull carbon dioxide directly from ambient air, independent of industrial processes. This method, though conceptually appealing, is also energy-intensive and costly. Carbon Capture Costs And Current Global Capacity According to the International Energy Agency 2023 report on Carbon Capture, global capacity for CCS is about 50 million tons of CO₂ per year, a mere fraction of global emissions. According to another IEA report in 2025, the International Energy Agency, energy-related CO₂ emissions rose by 0.8 % in 2024, reaching a record 37.8 gigatons. This increase pushed atmospheric concentrations to 422.5 parts per million which is around 50% higher than pre-industrial levels. Emissions from fuel combustion grew slightly, while those from industrial processes declined. Importantly, emissions rose at a slower pace than global GDP, signaling a return to the long-term trend of decoupling economic growth from emissions. A simple calculation was done and it shows that with a global carbon capture capacity of 50 million tons per year and annual energy-related emissions at 37.8 gigatons, current CCS efforts remove only about 0.13 percent of emissions, highlighting just how limited their impact is at present. According to a 2022 ScienceDirect article, direct air capture remains financially out of reach for most large-scale climate strategies, with current costs ranging from $264 to $1,000 per ton of CO₂ removed depending on the technology and energy source. Industry leaders like Climeworks have also reported costs between $600 and $1,000 per ton. Driving these costs down will require major advancements in three critical areas: air contactors, sorbents, and regeneration systems. With targeted innovation and policy support, future capture costs could fall to between $100 and $200 per ton. However, for DAC to make a meaningful impact, it must reach gigaton-scale removal at costs below $100 per ton by 2050. Why Big Tech and Big Oil Are Betting on Carbon Capture According to a 2024 Newsweek report, tech giants like Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta, and Salesforce are aggressively investing in carbon dioxide removal technologies to meet their net-zero targets and hedge against future climate risks. From backing nature-based reforestation to cutting-edge direct air capture systems like Climeworks' Mammoth plant in Iceland, these companies are deploying their capital to accelerate the scale-up of CDR solutions. The drivers are threefold: pressure to decarbonize amidst AI-driven energy demand, alignment with their innovation culture, and access to the financial resources needed to push nascent technologies to commercialization. Experts and tech leaders agree that early investment today is crucial to building a viable carbon removal infrastructure that can help offset hard-to-abate emissions and deliver on long-term climate goals. According to a 2024 CNBC article, oil and gas giants such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, Baker Hughes, and SLB are aggressively investing in carbon capture and storage, positioning it as a cornerstone strategy to decarbonize hard-to-abate sectors like cement and steel. Backed by billions in private capital and $12 billion in U.S. federal funding, these companies are expanding CCS infrastructure across the Gulf Coast, with Chevron's Bayou Bend and Exxon's recent $5 billion acquisition of Denbury serving as flagship moves. While the technology remains expensive and logistically complex, Big Oil sees CCS as both a business opportunity and a bridge to net-zero, though critics caution it must not become a license to prolong fossil fuel dependency. The Role Of Carbon Capture In Real Climate Solutions Carbon capture should not be seen as a license to pollute but neither should it be dismissed outright. The technology, while still costly and logistically complex, holds real promise, particularly for sectors like steel, cement, and chemicals where decarbonization remains technically difficult. When used strategically and transparently, carbon removal can complement, not replace, ambitious emissions reductions. However, overreliance on engineered removals without slashing emissions at the source risks turning a climate solution into a climate distraction. Questions around permanence, leakage, and long-term liability remain unresolved. Without clear policy guardrails, independent verification, and ethical use, carbon capture risks becoming a shell game, boosting ESG optics while emissions continue unchecked. So is it science or strategy? The answer depends on how it is deployed. For the United States, the path forward requires balance: support targeted carbon capture in hard-to-abate sectors, but tie that support to aggressive emissions caps, clean energy investment, and full transparency. For island nations like Jamaica, where energy footprints are smaller and vulnerabilities higher, investment in nature-based solutions, resilient infrastructure, and renewables may offer the most climate and economic impact per dollar spent. The technology is real. The potential is real and what matters most now is intent, oversight, and ensuring carbon removal plays a supporting, not starring, role in our climate strategy.
