^Yup. Should have invested in alternative energy. Doubling down on a dying industry is bad economic development.
^ The energy industry is not going away anytime soon and one such expanding company is Apex oil
Peabody was one of St. Louis corporate entities who wanted to be in the core, downtown and was a very viable business when the incentives were provided. That is the reality if you want to bring jobs downtown or else you never see them downtown if your are going to get selective. Nor is clean energy is sure bet because your back to the reality that it is about the business entity or corporation itself, think SunEdison which teetering on bankruptcy itself and lets not forget about the Spanish company that overstretched itself resulting in shutting down its Chesterfield office. Heck, the Senators brother who stated the wind energy company based in St. Louis only to sell out because he couldn't the scale or purchase agreements to grow his company. So you got three clean energy companies and at least three coal or dirty energy companies in trouble or folded up shop locally.
Peabody was one of St. Louis corporate entities who wanted to be in the core, downtown and was a very viable business when the incentives were provided. That is the reality if you want to bring jobs downtown or else you never see them downtown if your are going to get selective. Nor is clean energy is sure bet because your back to the reality that it is about the business entity or corporation itself, think SunEdison which teetering on bankruptcy itself and lets not forget about the Spanish company that overstretched itself resulting in shutting down its Chesterfield office. Heck, the Senators brother who stated the wind energy company based in St. Louis only to sell out because he couldn't the scale or purchase agreements to grow his company. So you got three clean energy companies and at least three coal or dirty energy companies in trouble or folded up shop locally.
I thought Peabody didn't demand a TIF in expanding office space in Gateway One. Or was that someone else?
- 472
^I don't think Peabody got a TIF, but I remember a $6 to $11 million number floating around at that time for taxes they wouldn't owe or some sort of direct subsidy.
^^We still could invest in an energy industry with a future. We just lack any sort of effort.
I thought it was significant a few years ago when Clayton made the very minor commitment of paying all their power bills through Ameren's Pure Power program. Not the whole of Clayton, just the government buildings. Honestly that's not a huge amount of money. For my own house, I've been on Pure Power for years and pay maybe $30 more each year. Some months, it's just like $2 extra.
A similar commitment from the City of St. Louis for all its various buildings would probably cost a few thousand a year, but it could be used to strong arm local business groups, ZMD institutions, East-West Gateway, etc. into taking a similar pledge. Such a commitment from Metro might cost a whole lot more since they use so much power, but it would still be a good thing to do.
That would be a very simple start. That puts money semi-directly into our local renewables economy, and it wouldn't cost nearly as much as what we'd pay to attract just one big corporate headquarters.
^^We still could invest in an energy industry with a future. We just lack any sort of effort.
I thought it was significant a few years ago when Clayton made the very minor commitment of paying all their power bills through Ameren's Pure Power program. Not the whole of Clayton, just the government buildings. Honestly that's not a huge amount of money. For my own house, I've been on Pure Power for years and pay maybe $30 more each year. Some months, it's just like $2 extra.
A similar commitment from the City of St. Louis for all its various buildings would probably cost a few thousand a year, but it could be used to strong arm local business groups, ZMD institutions, East-West Gateway, etc. into taking a similar pledge. Such a commitment from Metro might cost a whole lot more since they use so much power, but it would still be a good thing to do.
That would be a very simple start. That puts money semi-directly into our local renewables economy, and it wouldn't cost nearly as much as what we'd pay to attract just one big corporate headquarters.
- 3,235
Sun Edison is going bankrupt because they expanded too fast and rely of yieldco's for revenue.
Many many other companies in the alternative energy sector are alive and well.
Many many other companies in the alternative energy sector are alive and well.
First, coal is hurting like all other energy sectors - especially oil and gas. The "oil war" seems to be putting a strain on all energy segments. Houston, Denver, OKC, Pittsburgh etc. are all experiencing layoffs in their energy sectors.PeterXCV wrote:Demonstrates the flawed logic of this thread in general we should embrace being a fossil fuel energy hub. Though such a plan should never have even been considered let alone supported due to climate change and coal related health impacts, at least the economic collapse of the industry will illustrate what a poor choice it was to shower Peabody with tax breaks.
Also, there has never been a local effort or "plan" to make St. Louis a fossil fuel hub. The coal companies just coalesced (pun intended) or aggregated in St. Louis due to natural factors such as proximity to the Illinois Coal Basin, St. Louis' central location, the port and rail hub.
I don't know anyone who has "embraced" St. Louis being solely a fossil fuel energy hub.
While it is true St. Louis has been a significant world coal node, I think most of us have embraced St. Louis being an "all-encompassing energy" hub i.e. biofuels, biomass, gas, wind, solar, ethanol, green etc. etc. Lots of assets in St. Louis.
If anything, my issue, at least, has been that St. Louis has not promoted itself as an energy hub, which I believe is causing it to be short-changed with energy-related jobs. Although those in the energy industry recognize St. Louis as an energy hub, ordinary people around the country as well as some in the industry, people don't always associate St. Louis with energy.
- 403
What exactly is St.Louis good at promoting itself as? The crime capitol of the country?
I mean our leaders here are failing St.Louisans hard and this never ending downward spiral has been churning for well over 50 years.
While the city did give Peadody tax incentives i don't think its beyond the city's control on how our US government has changed this country
Peabody is a victim of stern regulations the same with similar company's .. Peabody's run was bold and bright however all things do come to an end.
All I'm saying that Peabody's demise isn't in St.Louis's control however our leaders could find many positive progressive ways in promoting St.Louis
Like when the Hardee's owner said one of the reasonings for moving the company out of St.Louis was Nashvilles central location
Come on theres nothing centrally located about Nashville
Thats where our leaders fail us
I want great for St.Louis as a whole but we can't get that with stale leadership.
I mean our leaders here are failing St.Louisans hard and this never ending downward spiral has been churning for well over 50 years.
While the city did give Peadody tax incentives i don't think its beyond the city's control on how our US government has changed this country
Peabody is a victim of stern regulations the same with similar company's .. Peabody's run was bold and bright however all things do come to an end.
All I'm saying that Peabody's demise isn't in St.Louis's control however our leaders could find many positive progressive ways in promoting St.Louis
Like when the Hardee's owner said one of the reasonings for moving the company out of St.Louis was Nashvilles central location
Come on theres nothing centrally located about Nashville
Thats where our leaders fail us
I want great for St.Louis as a whole but we can't get that with stale leadership.
- 472
It depends on which leaders you refer to. The downtown partnership and the regional chamber do all right with the plant science and tech start-up stuff.
St. Louis kind of has to evolve despite the elected leaders holding it back. The business and non-profit sectors can do that and to some extent, government just follows along. It isn't ideal, but our non-profits are regional entities and our governments are not. There's a plurality of leadership, and it isn't all bad. Just push where you can and wait for a generation to pass before we get anywhere with the government part.
St. Louis kind of has to evolve despite the elected leaders holding it back. The business and non-profit sectors can do that and to some extent, government just follows along. It isn't ideal, but our non-profits are regional entities and our governments are not. There's a plurality of leadership, and it isn't all bad. Just push where you can and wait for a generation to pass before we get anywhere with the government part.
Rumors of coal's demise are greatly exaggerated. Fossil fuels will continue to provide nearly 80% of the world's energy through 2040, with coal being the second largest source.
It's much too soon for St. Louis to walk away from our fossil fuel companies, throw up our hands, and say "We should have seen the world changing and invested in renewable energy companies." We should try to attract renewable energy companies in industries like solar (booming) and wind (not so much), but these forms of energy are still minor players compared to fossil fuels and will continue to be so well into the middle of this century. Diversification, not transition, should be the goal.
So while coal's share of the market will slip a little bit in the coming decades, overall energy production worldwide is going to increase by 56%. In other words, there's still a growing market worldwide for coal. The challenge for U.S. coal companies should become competing for a share of this world market.According to the report, renewable energy sources as well as nuclear power will be the fastest-growing energy sources during the next few decades, each growing at 2.5 percent per year, while natural gas will be the fastest-growing fossil fuel. However, in 2040, coal will remain the second-largest fuel source behind petroleum and other liquid fuels, assuming that governments do not enact new policies to limit the use of fossil fuels in order to rein in emissions of global warming pollutants, such as carbon dioxide (CO2). The EIA omitted potential policies from its analysis due to the uncertainties about whether, when, and how they will be implemented.
...http://www.climatecentral.org/news/foss ... 2040-16284
It's much too soon for St. Louis to walk away from our fossil fuel companies, throw up our hands, and say "We should have seen the world changing and invested in renewable energy companies." We should try to attract renewable energy companies in industries like solar (booming) and wind (not so much), but these forms of energy are still minor players compared to fossil fuels and will continue to be so well into the middle of this century. Diversification, not transition, should be the goal.
- 3,235
Yeah, the problem with Peabody is they purchased companies and mines at the high point of the market. Revenue went down and couldn't cover the debt.
Multiple articles in the Post-Dispatch over the past week.
Corporate coal hub of St. Louis faces more big bankruptcies
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... fe57a.html
Bankruptcy or not, Peabody Energy plans to stay in St. Louis
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... ca421.html
Corporate coal hub of St. Louis faces more big bankruptcies
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... fe57a.html
Bankruptcy or not, Peabody Energy plans to stay in St. Louis
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... ca421.html
With the coal industry faltering, and Tesla recently having the biggest one day sale of any product in the history of mankind (Model 3), have any of our civic leaders looked at trying to attract them here? Tesla will likely be building additional factories in Europe, China and somewhere east of California.
As I understand, France and Slovakia have both approached Tesla about building a factory in their countries.
As I understand, St Louis has a history of car manufacturing. It would be nice to try to bring some of that back. I think if Tesla builds another factory in the US, it will likely be in the South or somewhere in the Midwest other than Michigan .
As I understand, France and Slovakia have both approached Tesla about building a factory in their countries.
As I understand, St Louis has a history of car manufacturing. It would be nice to try to bring some of that back. I think if Tesla builds another factory in the US, it will likely be in the South or somewhere in the Midwest other than Michigan .
- 2,052
FWIW, we actually have a Tesla sales office here - its on Olive and 170. But I know you mean manufacturing... where would we put them though? I guess we could give them the old plant right?
I believe Telsa is set with manufacturing and development space for a while. They bought out the massive joint venture auto manufacturing facility in Fremont, CA where they currently put cars together. On top of it, they bought out even more real estate around it including the huge facility the failed solar manufacturer had built after getting a clean energy grant/loan (Can think of the name just can't remember how it is spelled - Solyandra or something like that).
I believe in Its heyday the Fremont facility was spitting well north of 500,000 cars a years. In addition, building the massive space outside in Reno, NV for the battery manufacturing and warehouse which will make for a pretty efficient delivery on demand operation when you can essentially put batteries on a truck, get on I80, head west and deliver to the plant same day and have installed before the morning sun comes back up next the day. Not to mention the labor differential in being in Nevada for the major cost component of your vehicle. I don't see them in need of capacity for years to come.
Probably the best hope to add auto capacity was the proposed Hazelwood plant for English startup that got bought up by the Chinese. Maintaining that connection is still relevant if can lead to Chinese investment in manufacturing.
I believe in Its heyday the Fremont facility was spitting well north of 500,000 cars a years. In addition, building the massive space outside in Reno, NV for the battery manufacturing and warehouse which will make for a pretty efficient delivery on demand operation when you can essentially put batteries on a truck, get on I80, head west and deliver to the plant same day and have installed before the morning sun comes back up next the day. Not to mention the labor differential in being in Nevada for the major cost component of your vehicle. I don't see them in need of capacity for years to come.
Probably the best hope to add auto capacity was the proposed Hazelwood plant for English startup that got bought up by the Chinese. Maintaining that connection is still relevant if can lead to Chinese investment in manufacturing.
- 337
Peabody, world's top private coal miner, files for bankruptcy
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 5e415.htmlPeabody Energy Corp., the world's largest privately owned coal producer, filed for U.S. bankruptcy protection on Wednesday in the wake of a sharp fall in coal prices that left it unable to service a recent debt-fueled expansion into Australia.
The St. Louis-based company listed both assets and liabilities in the range of $10 billion to $50 billion, according to a court filing.
SunEdison files for bankruptcy
Not a great month for St. Louis-area energy companies
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 8055f.htmlMaryland Heights-based solar company SunEdison filed for bankruptcy Thursday, making it one of the largest bankruptcies by asset value involving a non-financial company in a decade.
Not a great month for St. Louis-area energy companies
Yep, it sure is not.Mound City wrote:SunEdison files for bankruptcy
Not a great month for St. Louis-area energy companies
Energy is hurting EVERYWHERE. Chevron laid off 650 people in Houston a few weeks ago.
Although coal has been impacted largely by federal policy, when oil and gas prices drop, demand for other sources of energy drop.
Energy sectors are hurting in every city that has a high percentage of energy-related companies and jobs.
Solar was all the rage when oil and gas prices were skyrocketing. Now you barely hear a peep.
St. Louis is joining Silicon Valley, New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Fort Collins/Denver, Portland, Charlotte and Atlanta by creating a new energy start-up accelerator. See worldwide map HERE.
Ameren launches energy startup accelerator
Apr 3, 2017, 10:30am CDT
INDUSTRIES & TAGS Energy, Renewable Energy
Brian Feldt
Senior Reporter
St. Louis Business Journal
Ameren Corp. (NYSE: AEE) has launched a new startup accelerator that will invest in early-stage energy technology companies. The accelerator is part of Ameren’s focus on innovative technologies that make the energy grid smarter and more reliable.
Ameren is partnering the University of Missouri System, UMSL Accelerator and St. Louis-based tech accelerator Capital Innovators on the 12-week program.
The energy accelerator will invest $100,000 in five to seven companies each year. Those companies will participate in the program that will be based out of the Cortex innovation district.
The first class is expected to be announced in July.
“As new energy technologies rapidly advance, it is critical that we take bold steps today to better position Ameren to meet our customers’ future energy needs and expectations,” said Ameren CEO Warner Baxter. “This forward thinking initiative is expected to draw innovators, entrepreneurs and business startups from around the world to St. Louis and to provide us with important insights and technologies to deliver long-term value to our customers and the communities we serve. At the same time, this initiative will enhance St. Louis’ already robust innovation and entrepreneurship community, attract top-level talent, educate university students and create jobs.”
Over the last decade, St. Louis has become a hotspot for startup accelerators.
READ MORE
Ameren launches energy startup accelerator
Apr 3, 2017, 10:30am CDT
INDUSTRIES & TAGS Energy, Renewable Energy
Brian Feldt
Senior Reporter
St. Louis Business Journal
Ameren Corp. (NYSE: AEE) has launched a new startup accelerator that will invest in early-stage energy technology companies. The accelerator is part of Ameren’s focus on innovative technologies that make the energy grid smarter and more reliable.
Ameren is partnering the University of Missouri System, UMSL Accelerator and St. Louis-based tech accelerator Capital Innovators on the 12-week program.
The energy accelerator will invest $100,000 in five to seven companies each year. Those companies will participate in the program that will be based out of the Cortex innovation district.
The first class is expected to be announced in July.
“As new energy technologies rapidly advance, it is critical that we take bold steps today to better position Ameren to meet our customers’ future energy needs and expectations,” said Ameren CEO Warner Baxter. “This forward thinking initiative is expected to draw innovators, entrepreneurs and business startups from around the world to St. Louis and to provide us with important insights and technologies to deliver long-term value to our customers and the communities we serve. At the same time, this initiative will enhance St. Louis’ already robust innovation and entrepreneurship community, attract top-level talent, educate university students and create jobs.”
Over the last decade, St. Louis has become a hotspot for startup accelerators.
READ MORE
- 2,430
per BizJourno, SunEdison is no longer present here with everyone out at Maryland Hts.
The company that was here in St. Louis does not even really exist anymore.STLrainbow wrote: ↑Jul 28, 2017per BizJourno, SunEdison is no longer present here with everyone out at Maryland Hts.
- 8,904
This article is behind a pay wall so I'll post up some snipets
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... or-vc.html
St. Louis could be the next energy disruptor, VC says
The millions of acres of corn and soybeans planted within a 500-mile radius — and the ethanol those crops can produce — can transform St. Louis into the next big disruptor of the energy sector, according to Eric McAfee, Silicon Valley venture capitalist and founder and CEO of Aemetis Inc. (NASDAQ: AMTX), a Cupertino, California-based renewable fuels and biochemicals company.
The amount of corn and soybeans growing in the St. Louis region, McAfee said, is a level of “production that is not replicated anywhere else in the world.”
Moore said Monsanto has been able to compete with Google, Amazon and other tech behemoths in attracting and retaining talent in data science.
“There’s been a digital transformation in ag that’s happened over the past several years,” Moore said. “It’s become super sexy to be a farmer.”
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... or-vc.html
Corn and soybeans should feed people and livestock; not cars. There are other, non-food plants that are more appropriate for ethanol production.
STL being a capital for ethanol production would create how many jobs?
You can make ethanol from weeds. And there's plenty of that!
For years there's been a surplus of corn, more than livestock and human consumption can take (and really, only North Americans eat corn.) That's why corn is in everything — glue, dyes, cosmetics, plastics, textile. The corn industry has been shoving its glut into where ever it can to absorb annual yields (thanks 1970s Ag policy). That's why soda went from cane sugar to HFCS. And popular opinion is turning against HFCS so ethanol may be the way to go.
^ Good points. Just to add to the concerns is NAFTA has been one of the bright spots for US grain and corn export markets in terms of US production & that might easily be upended if POTUS pulls out. South America could easily fill the gap and leave US with even more of a corn glut.
In terms of St. Louis, I think the real concern is how will Bunge NA make out in a changing commodity world in part to a lot of the big South American producers selling direct to Asian buyers & forgoing the middle man such as the Cargill & Bunge of the world as well as the fact that US exports not as strong as they use to be for various reasons, even more so if we drop out of NAFTA. Expanded ethanol production might another agriculture niche that help Bunge NA be a stand alone instead of being sold off to Cargill or the likes.
My side bar, ethanol is just one more of the long list of transportation items subsidized that people go into denial about.
In terms of St. Louis, I think the real concern is how will Bunge NA make out in a changing commodity world in part to a lot of the big South American producers selling direct to Asian buyers & forgoing the middle man such as the Cargill & Bunge of the world as well as the fact that US exports not as strong as they use to be for various reasons, even more so if we drop out of NAFTA. Expanded ethanol production might another agriculture niche that help Bunge NA be a stand alone instead of being sold off to Cargill or the likes.
My side bar, ethanol is just one more of the long list of transportation items subsidized that people go into denial about.