Latest news with #CoalIndia
Time of India
7 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Coal India Share Price Live Updates: Coal India Ltd Stock Details
Stay updated with the Coal India Stock Liveblog, your one-stop destination for real-time information and analysis of a leading stock. Explore the latest updates on Coal India stock, including: Last traded price 387.0, Market capitalization: 239206.3, Volume: 857482, Price-to-earnings ratio 6.77, Earnings per share 57.37. Our liveblog combines fundamental and technical insights to offer a comprehensive overview of Coal India's performance. Gain valuable market knowledge and make informed decisions with our expert analysis. Be the first to know about breaking news that can impact Coal India's trajectory. Join us on this journey as we explore the exciting potential of Coal India. The data points are updated as on 10:20:14 AM IST, 24 Jul 2025 Show more Show less
Economic Times
16 hours ago
- Business
- Economic Times
Parliament Watch: India finds 7.23 MT rare earth reserves; NH build pace slows, key infra updates shared in Parliament
India holds substantial rare earth reserves, estimated at 7.23 million tonnes, primarily in coastal regions, alongside augmented resources of REE ore. Coal India has addressed a significant number of consumer grievances related to coal quality. The Dehradun-Delhi highway is slated for completion by October 2025, while a government-WEF partnership aims to enhance skills development. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The rare earth element resources estimated by the Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research (AMD), a unit of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), is around 7.23 million tonnes in-situ Rare Earth Elements oxide (REO) contained in 13.15 million tonnes monazite, a mineral of Thorium and Rare Earths occurring in the coastal beach, red sand and inland alluvium in parts of Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Gujarat and Maharashtra, minister Jitendra Singh informed the lower house. Around 1.29 million tonnes in-situ REO resource in hard rocks in parts of Gujarat and Rajasthan. Additionally, Geological Survey of India (GSI) has augmented 482.6 Mt resources of REE ore at various cut-off grades in 34 exploration projects. Coal India Ltd has received 186 consumer grievances, other than that of the Comptroller and Auditor General, related to coal quality issues since July 2023, minister G Kishan Reddy said. Out of them, 171 grievances have been resolved, he informed the Lok Sabha. Resolution of these grievances is a continuous process and is as per established procedure, he Dehradun-Delhi access controlled highway with a total capital cost of `11,868.6 crore is targeted for completion by October 2025, road transport and highway minister Nitin Gadkari said on Wednesday in response to a question in Rajya ministry of skill development and entrepreneurship (MSDE), in collaboration with the World Economic Forum (WEF) is working on India Skills Accelerator initiative to close skilling gaps through inclusive upskilling and reskilling, mobilizing investment in lifelong learning, and fostering government industry collaboration, Jayant Chaudhary, minister of state (independent charge), MSDE said in response to a question in Rajya Sabha on government has constructed 10,660 km of length of national highways (NHs) during 2024-25 or 29 km per day, road transport and highway minister Nitin Gadkari said in response to a question in Rajya Sabha on Wednesday. This is the second lowest pace of construction in the last five years, lowest being 28 km per day in 2022-23.
Time of India
a day ago
- Business
- Time of India
Coal India Share Price Live Updates: Coal India Price and Daily Returns Overview
23 Jul 2025 | 10:15:42 AM IST Stay up-to-date with the Coal India Stock Liveblog, your trusted source for real-time updates and thorough analysis of a prominent stock. Explore the latest details on Coal India, including: Last traded price 390.75, Market capitalization: 240839.42, Volume: 903978, Price-to-earnings ratio 6.82, Earnings per share 57.37. Get a comprehensive understanding of Coal India with our coverage of both fundamental and technical indicators. Stay informed about breaking news that can have a significant impact on Coal India's performance. Our expert opinions and recommendations empower you to make well-informed investment choices. Trust the Coal India Stock Liveblog to keep you informed and equipped in the dynamic market landscape. The data points are updated as on 10:15:41 AM IST, 23 Jul 2025 Show more
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Business
- Indian Express
SBI QIP update: How much money did India's largest lender raise and where will be the funds be used
The country's biggest lender State Bank of India (SBI) has raised Rs 25,000 crore through qualified institutional placement (QIP) route. The issue is the biggest share sale to institutional investors in the country's capital market. The fund raised will boost the bank's common equity tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio – the core equity capital, which indicates a bank's financial strength. It will enable the bank to further extend credit to various key sectors such as retail and corporate. What is a qualified institutional placement? QIP is one of the capital raising instruments used by listed companies to garner funds by issuing equity shares to qualified institutional buyers (QIBs), including venture capital funds, pension funds and mutual funds. Through a QIP, a listed issuer issues eligible securities to QIBs on a private placement basis. It also includes an offer for sale of specified securities by the promoters and/or promoter group on a private placement basis. QIBs are sophisticated investors and possess the expertise and resources to take an informed investment decision independently. These investors are generally well-versed with the issuer's business operations, financials and industry positions. How much capital has SBI raised through its QIP? In May this year, the bank had received board approval to raise equity capital aggregating up to Rs 25,000 crore in one or more tranches during FY26 through QIP/ follow-on public offer (FPO) or any other permitted mode. The lender, which opened its QIP for subscription on July 16, managed to raise Rs 25,000 crore in one tranche. This QIP was the biggest issue in the domestic capital markets, surpassing Coal India's Rs 22,560 crore QIP launched in 2015. It was also for the first time since 2017 that SBI mobilised funds through equity sale. The bank had raised Rs 15,000 crore in June 2017. What was the floor price of the QIP? The SBI QIP floor price had been set at Rs 811.05 per equity share, a 2.5 per cent discount over the July 16 (when the issue was launched) closing price of the bank's share price at Rs 831.55 apiece. The bank on Monday (July 21) said the shares in the QIP were priced at a premium to floor price of Rs 811.05 per share. The floor price of the securities is determined based on Sebi regulations. It is calculated as the average of the closing prices of a company's shares over the preceding two weeks from a relevant date. How did investors respond to SBI's QIP? SBI said the QIP received robust demand and was oversubscribed 4.5 times, reflecting strong investor confidence in its strategy and the outlook for the country's banking sector. Foreign investors accounted for 64.3 per cent of total demand, underscoring the attractiveness of the country's growth story. Marquee long-term investors received nearly 88 per cent of the final allocation, including 24 per cent of the issue size placed with foreign long-term investors. How will the fund raise benefit SBI? The capital raised through the QIP will augment SBI's core equity capital – common equity tier 1 (CET1) capital ratio to 11.5 per cent from 10.81 per cent as on March 31, 2025. Capital equity tier 1 is defined as a bank's core equity capital as a percentage of risk-weighted assets. It shows a bank's solvency or its ability to absorb losses immediately. It is an indicator of a bank's financial strength. Improvement in CET 1 ratio shows accretion of high-quality capital by banks. The bank said the funds mobilised through the QIP will support a calibrated credit growth across retail, micro, small & medium enterprises (MSME) and corporate segments.
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Keeping us hooked on fossil fuels': how can we negotiate with autocracies on the climate crisis?
When it comes to the climate crisis, how do you negotiate with an autocracy? It is the case today, and it is almost certain to remain so for the dwindling number of years in which we can hope to stave off the worst of climate breakdown, that the bulk of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from countries that are not democratic. Add to that, many of the major suppliers of oil and gas – the Gulf petrostates for instance, plus Russia, Venezuela and a few others – are likewise authoritarian. Their outsize impact puts autocratic nations in the spotlight when it comes to global climate talks. How their governments decide to act will be crucial to the planet's future. But while democracies are subject to the whims of electorates, which can often be unpredictable, autocratic nations tend to be far more inscrutable. Take the small handful of the world's biggest fossil fuel companies, referred to as the 'carbon majors'. They hold our future in their hands, and of the top 20 with the biggest carbon output globally, 16 are state-owned and were responsible for 52% of global emissions in 2023. But these companies are generally accountable only to the governments that own them. The great majority – including Saudi Arabia's Aramco, China's CHN Energy and Jinneng Holding Group and the National Iranian Oil Company – are owned by autocracies or authoritarian governments. Among the top five biggest emitters, only Coal India belongs to a democracy. Does this matter? For many years, climate diplomats took the pragmatic view that it did not. 'When we were negotiating, I was not really thinking about where these governments came on the scale of democracy,' said Todd Stern, the US chief negotiator under Barack Obama, who helped craft the Paris agreement. But now the question has assumed a new significance. The power over the planet wielded by a small number of autocratic states is greater than ever. Their actions could effectively determine whether the world succeeds in limiting global heating to less than catastrophic levels. 'The carbon majors [of all kinds] are keeping the world hooked on fossil fuels, with no plans to slow production, said Christiana Figueres, the former UN climate chief who presided over the 2015 Paris summit. 'While states drag their heels on their Paris agreement commitments, state-owned companies are dominating global emissions – ignoring the desperate needs of their citizens.' Their position needs to shift. But how on earth can that be done? The chief executive of this year's climate summit in Brazil, Ana Toni, said: 'Climate is a topic that we can only solve in a multilateral way. And in that multilateral way, we have democracies and we have countries that have different political systems. We need to bring all of them along.' In the past, countries such as Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia – the world's fourth, seventh and 10th biggest emitters respectively – kept a low profile, and other countries tended to allow them to do so in the hope of preventing them from disrupting an already fragile process. Recently, however, some of those countries have begun to take a more active role in blocking the negotiations. Russia is the source of vast quantities of online disinformation about the climate crisis, and Saudi Arabia has sought to derail and water down commitments at UN climate summits, including altering a key text last year. 'They, and other petrostates, have gotten away with their morbid resource dependence, which is terribly harmful for the planet,' said Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate adviser. So can autocracies be persuaded to take action on climate change, and if so how? There is room for optimism, experts point out. Being state-owned, or operating within an authoritarian country or under a populist leader, does not prevent companies with high emissions from environmental progressiveness, according to Francis Fukuyama, a scholar of political systems and author of The End of History, a seminal work on democracy. Authoritarian states hold all the levers of power and can simply order their companies to shift to low-carbon technology. 'If an authoritarian state wants to move on climate policy, whether for mitigation [cutting emissions] or adaptation, it can do so more easily because it does not face the kinds of entrenched interest groups that democracies deal with,' he said. China is a good example. Now the world's biggest producer of renewable energy, the country has registered record exports of electric vehicles, solar panels and other components of low-carbon technology. The director general of the World Trade Organization, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, credits the far-sightedness of China's leadership for the transformation. 'You can have a situation in which an autocracy decides that this is the right thing to do because it's existential, and I think China decided to do that,' she said. 'I don't believe that the nature of that autocracy necessarily stands in the way of being a responsible climate citizen. And I don't think that we should be too proud that democracies are doing everything right.' But the problem is that even the supposed advantages autocracies possess, in the form of command over the economy, can prove illusory on examination. Much research has been done on whether autocracies or democracies are more likely to take action on climate change and the results are unclear, according to Ross Mittiga, an associate professor at the School of Oriental and African Studies (Soas) in London and author of a recent book on the subject. 'There is no strong evidence that democracies are better or worse equipped to address the climate crisis than non-democratic regimes,' he said. 'Of the top emitters, some are democratic, others are not, but all are failing to do the minimum needed to avert catastrophe.' What are the issues that might deter autocracies from taking action? Internally, the lack of pressure from below is a major problem, and arguably – along with transparency – the biggest difference with democracies. Popular protest has been one of the main means by which environmental action has been achieved in the past. The economist Nicholas Stern points, for example, to the first Earth Day demonstrations in the US, on 22 April 1970, in which more than 20 million people are estimated to have taken part. Within a few years, the US had a Clean Air Act, a Clean Water Act and an Environmental Protection Agency – all brought in by the Republican president Richard Nixon, and maddeningly all now gutted by the Republican president Donald Trump. Thomas Piketty, the French economist and author of several critiques of capitalism, wants to take this further. 'We definitely need social protest and popular pressure to deliver climate action,' he said. 'But formal democracy is not enough: we need equal voice, effective democratic participation, mass mobilisation and powerful collective organisations to curb money interests and to promote ambitious platforms of institutional transformation. This is how we were able to achieve substantial progress in social, economic and political equality in the past two centuries.' Protesting to urge climate action in countries where democracy is under threat is at best perilous, and can be fatal. In Georgia, where a fledgling democracy has taken a turn towards ultra-conservatism under Russia's influence, Nugzar Kokhreidze, the co-founder of the Dialogue of Generations group describes the reality of activism: 'Some have already left the country. Others keep fighting, but without funding and under constant fear of arrest or repression. This severely limits the space for activism and narrows the possibilities for action.' In many of these countries, fossil fuels represent a super-powered economic interest. In Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran, they literally fuel the entire economy, and the erasure of protest means there is no counterbalance. 'In autocracies that are deeply committed to fossil fuel development as part of their economic models, there is no real internal resistance to that,' said Mittiga. Bledsoe points to Russia, where leaks from oil and gas production are some of the worst in the world, and the government has refused to take any action to reduce them even though it could be profitable to do so. 'They have insanely high fugitive methane emissions from their hydrocarbon production, and they have very little incentive to prevent it,' he said. Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion Much depends on the economic situation of the country involved, adds Stern. 'Russia and Saudi Arabia are best understood in taking their position as people with direct vested interests, rather than necessarily to do with democracy or autocracy,' he said. 'We have to, as political economists, understand vested interests.' A further issue might be the corrupting effect that authoritarian hierarchy has on information flows. Shiran Victoria Shen, a senior research scholar at Stanford University, says, for example, that autocracies may plan to put positive environmental strategies in place, but 'they often struggle with implementation due to information asymmetries – leaders may not always receive accurate reports from local enforcers and often lack alternative channels to verify information, making it harder to ensure compliance'. What about pressure from outside? Transparency, or the lack of it, is perhaps the most important issue. In 2016, for example, just after the Paris agreement had been signed, analysts said China's emissions may have peaked, but it was a false hope. Despite forecasts of a plunge in coal use, China's leadership took a decisive but covert turn back towards fossil fuels. The government had appeared ready to cancel coal contracts, but satellite images revealed coal-fired power stations being built. The country's coal sector roared back to life, and in every year since, apart from a slight decrease in 2022, emissions have increased. With an autocracy, there is no way of knowing quite how or why a decision has been made or whether it will be made again. China has pledged to produce a new national plan on emissions before the Cop30 UN climate summit in November. That single document will do more than any other political decision this year to determine whether the world can hold global heating to safe limits. But the country's officials are under strict orders to be tight-lipped about its contents. 'The plan is all in Xi Jinping's head at the moment,' one veteran observer of Cops said. 'We are finding that no one [in government] will talk about it.' China could double down on its huge investment in renewables, or Xi could listen to the strong vested interests of the coal sector, deeply embedded in China's economy and polity. 'I would not rule out a return to coal,' said Li Shuo, the director of the China climate hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute. Unlike companies quoted on stock exchanges, state-owned entities and some other forms of company headquartered in authoritarian states face few requirements to disclose their finances or activities. Saudi Arabia scaled back plans for a partial flotation of Aramco, partly to limit such disclosure. 'In well-regulated democracies, you ought to be able to find out who [whether companies or branches of government] is doing what and where,' said Bledsoe. 'That's not the case with authoritarian states.' External pressure could be brought to bear by economic means. The EU, the UK and other developed countries have, for example, put forward carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs), under which imported high-carbon goods such as steel would face stiff tariffs. But there are problems with this approach too. Many smaller developing countries are furious, fearing they will be penalised as well. Work has begun on the reporting stage of the EU's CBAM, but it has not yet entered full operation. Before reaching for such a drastic tool – particularly in a world reeling from the impacts of Trump's on-off-on tariffs – countries tend to try a more traditional approach. Before the 2015 Paris summit, France pioneered '360 degree diplomacy' – using every embassy, consulate and cultural institution in every country around the world as a channel to talk about climate. Brazil, as host of Cop30, is taking a similarly cooperative tack, appointing 30 special envoys from around the world to help with its mission. Sometimes the personal touch can win out against the apparent odds. John Kerry, a US climate envoy under Joe Biden, enjoyed such a warm rapport over many years with his Chinese counterpart, Xie Zhenhua, that before retiring within days of each other, the two men gave a last joint press conference at Cop28 in 2023, in which they shared anecdotes about the attendance of Xie's young grandson at Kerry's 80th birthday party. Their successors, Liu Zhenmin and John Podesta, tried to recreate some of that warmth a few months later at a cosy meal in the latter's Washington home. Democracy being what it is, however, Podesta was ousted when Trump took over, and future US-China climate dinners are now unlikely. The fact is that many democracies are not faring much better. The US has withdrawn from the Paris agreement and the White House is dismantling domestic environmental regulations. Canada and Australia have both elected centrist leaders this year in free and fair elections. They gave pledged allegiance to the climate cause, but are actively pursuing fossil fuel expansion. Japan, the UK and the EU are are also still hooked on fossil fuels despite fine words and targets. The UK, where Labour was elected pledging to end new North Sea oil and gas licences, is considering giving the go-ahead to the vast Rosebank oilfield on the technicality that it was already within the planning system. 'Democracies are more hypocritical,' said Jayati Ghosh, an Indian development economist and professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts. 'The problem with democracies is that capital can exert much more pressure than any other stakeholder.' Vera Songwe, a Cameroonian economist and executive secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa, says governments can find ways of working together with a common motive. 'We must try to meet countries where they are. Everyone is looking for growth and we must be able to demonstrate that green growth is possible.'
