The article presents an analysis of Russia’s participation in international steam coal trade, which has been its important participant for years. The research covered the years 2014–2018. The geographical location on two continents and the availability of coal deposits, favors its presence on both the Pacific and Atlantic markets. The article also discusses the main coal producers in Russia and the prices of Russian steam coal directed to the spot market. Due to the significant share of coal exports for the Russian economy, the focus was also on analyzing Russian seaports. In recent years, Asian exports have dominated in Russian steam coal exports. The share of export to this market in the years 2014–2018 was in the range of 49–57% (60–87 million tons). Currently, three countries play an important role among Asian countries: South Korea, China and J apan. They purchased a total of 38–52 million tons of Russian coal. Although in the years under analysis Russia exported 52–67 million tons of steam coal to the European market, the share of this market dropped from almost half to around 40%. T he slow departure from coal energy contributes to reducing the share of recipients from this direction. Among European countries, in 2014 the main direction of export was Great Britain with 19% (24 million tons) of total export share. In 2018, exports fell to 9 million tons (5%). Among European destinations for Russian coal, Poland’s share is growing in importance. In the years 2014–2018, steam coal exports to Poland varied in the range of 5.6–16.2 million tons. In the years 2014–2018 it changed in the range of 5.6–16.2 million tons. The dynamic growth achieved in the last three years is noteworthy. In relation to 2016, imports increased by 10.0 million tons and in 2018 amounted to as much as 16.1 million tons. The article also discusses the geographical structure of coal imports to Poland by railway border crossings and seaports.
The aim of the paper was to estimate how the value of 1 GJ of energy in coal with a calorific value of 5500 kcal/kg varies on the international coal market compared to 1 GJ of energy in coal with a calorific value of 6000 kcal/kg. The analysis of data from different ports was intended to answer the question of whether the pricing of coals of different producers according to their calorific value is convergent. The best-known price standard for thermal coal is 25.1 MJ/kg coal (6000 kcal/kg) and, until recently, coals with such quality parameters dominated international trade. Currently, coals with parameters other than considered to be standard parameters are traded on the coal market, hence it is necessary to price a unit of energy (e.g. 1 GJ) contained in these coals. The indices have been selected of the largest exporters of thermal coal for which data was available and referred to the same coal types (grades) determined on the same basis (FOB). Theoretically, the price differential between 6000 kcal/kg and 5000 kcal/kg coal (in USD/ton) should be (at least) as much as the difference in calorific value, i.e. about 9% per USD/ton. In reality, the price differential between these types of coal is greater, though. The overall conclusion of the analysis is that the price calculated per 1 GJ of energy fluctuated on average by 5.9% over the entire period considered. The analytical results obtained for coal from four countries are quite convergent, so it can be assumed that the calculated relationship between the prices of coal with different calorific values (6000 and 5000 kcal/kg) is a good approximation of the observed relationships in the international trade. The calculation results provide a simple formula allowing to estimate the price of coal with a calorific value other than the standard 25.1 MJ/kg (6000 kcal/kg) using the relationships from the international market.
Over the past two years, coking coal prices have been the most volatile among major bulk commodities. On the supply side, the most important factor determining the movement of coal prices were weather problems affecting the exports of coal from Australia (Queensland), where the production of the best quality coking coals is concentrated. On the demand side, an important factor is the growing role of China on the market, which, being the world’s largest producer and consumer of metallurgical coal, has also become its largest importer. The dominant, about 75% share of China in the global spot market has resulted in their level of activity influencing the periodic price decreases or increases in international trade and prices based on CFR China (along with Australian FOB prices) have become important indicators to monitor market trends and determine levels of negotiated benchmarks. The exceptional volatility on the market led to a change in the quarterly price fixing mechanism for hard-load hard coal contractors in mid–2017 to apply a formula that assumes the valuation of their quarterly volumes based on the average of the basket of spot price indices. This reflects the broader trend of the evolving market, with growing spot market activity. The article describes the current situation on the international coking coal market and presents short-term forecasts for hard coking hard coal prices (PHCC LV), which are a reference point for fixing prices of other types of metallurgical coal (hard standard, semi-soft, PCI).
Over the past decade, the growing demand for imported coal from consumers (mainly Asian) coincided with supply constraints on the part of major suppliers. The sequence of events is referred to as force majeure. There were many events in the exporting countries, mainly including the cyclone and floods in Australia (Queensland, the world’s largest hard coking coal mining region). Imbalance between supply and demand causes commodity prices to be subject to cyclical changes, but in recent years the frequency and dynamics of these changes in the international metallurgical market (hard coking coal, semi-soft coking coal, PCI coal) has been extremely high. China, the world’s largest producer and consumer of coking coal, played a leading role in these events. Political action by the Chinese authorities regarding their domestic mining and metallurgical industries and the coke-chemical industry has made the country dethrone Japan since 2013 and has become a global leader in metallurgical coal imports. The rise of China’s importance in coal trading has become an important benchmark for monitoring market trends and benchmarking benchmarks. The market has become more bipolar and CFR China’s prices (in addition to Australia’s FOB prices). The paper describes the path of pricing mechanism changes in international trade contracts for metallurgical coal, against the background of market conditions that generate these changes.
Coal production in 2018 increased by 3.3% and amounted to 7.81 million tons. Compared to 2010, it increased by 620 million tons. The structure of coal production in the world is very stable in the analyzed period of 2010–2018. Steam coal dominates in production with a share of 77%. Since 1990, the share of coal in the consumption of primary energy carriers has fallen by 3% in the global economy. In the EU, the share of coal in the consumption of primary energy carriers is more than twice lower than in the world, and in 2018 amounted to 13%. BP estimates the sufficiency of coal proven reserves based on 2018 data for the next 132 years. For oil and gas, they are estimated at 51 years. The decline in hard coal production in the European U nion can be dated almost continuously since 1990, which has decreased by 74%. In 2018, 74 million tons of coal were produced in the EU. In 2018, hard coal consumption in EU countries dropped to 226 million tons, i.e. by 20.6%. In 2018, global trade in steam coal amounted to 1.14 billion tons. The situation in China is crucial for the international coal market. The slight change in the import policy of this country significantly affects the situation in international trade in steam coal. In 2019, coal prices (at Newcastle, Richards Bay, ARA ports) dropped by an average of 23 U SD/ton. The average decreases for these three indices were 33%. The prices of steam coal in the forecasts presented in the paper are under pressure of the falling demand.
Ensuring access to a stable supply of a number of raw materials has become a serious challenge for domestic and regional economies with limited production, the EU economy alike. Reliable and unconstrained access to certain raw materials is an ever more serious concern. In order to tackle this challenge, the European Commission has established a list of Critical Raw Materials (CRMs) for the EU, which is regularly reviewed and updated. In its Communication COM(217) 490 final of September 13, 2017, the European Commission presented an updated list of 27 critical raw materials for the EU as a result of a third assessment based on a refined methodology developed by the Commission. Economic Importance (EI) and Supply Risk (SR) have remained the two main parameters to determine the criticality of a given raw material. The list of critical raw materials for the EU includes raw materials that reach or exceed the thresholds for both parameters set by the European Commission. The only exception is coking coal (included in the list of critical raw materials for the first time in 2014) which, although not reaching the economic importance threshold, has been conditionally kept on the 2017 list for the sake of caution. Should it not fully meet this criterion, it will be withdrawn from the list during the next assessment. The article discusses the most important changes to the methodology used in the third review and their impacts on the coking coal criticality assessment. It presents the geographical structure of coking coal global production and consumption as well as the degree to which the EU is reliant on coking coal imports. Raw materials, even if not classified as critical raw materials, are essential for the European economy as they are at the beginning of manufacturing value chains. Their availability may change rapidly due to developments in trade flows or trade policy, which reveals the general need for the diversification of supply.
In 1989–2017 women’s magazines were an important segment of Poland’s media market dominated by international publishing houses like Bauer Media, Edipresse Polska and Burda International. Each year they launched new leads (a total of about one hundred in that period). Most of them were successful in terms of sales and ad revenue. This article tries to chart the quantitative changes and major trends in the women’s magazines market as well as analyze the role of foreign capital in its development.