UC RUSAL, the world's largest aluminum producer, announces changes in the company's organizational structure. The Aluminum and Alumina divisions are divided into eastern and western divisions. A commercial directorate and a directorate for the development of production have also been created. These subdivisions were transferred to the subordination of the First Deputy General Director of UC RUSAL Vladislav Solovyov.
Alumina Division East merged Russian alumina assets: Timan Bauxite, Achinsk alumina refinery, Boksitogorsk alumina refinery, Severouralsk bauxite mine, Bogoslovsky and Ural aluminum smelters, as well as Nikolaev alumina refinery in Ukraine. The division was headed by Valery Matvienko, who previously held the position of First Deputy General Director for Operations at OJSC MMC Norilsk Nickel. The alumina division Vostok will focus on the uninterrupted supply of alumina to the company's aluminum enterprises, taking into account their technological and logistical features.
International Alumina Division merged Western bauxite mining and alumina production enterprises: Phrygia BGK (Guinea), Kindia Bauxite Company (Guinea), Guyana Bauxite Company, Aughinish Alumina (Ireland), Alpart (Jamaica), Eurallumina (Italy), Windalco (Jamaica), Queensland Alumina (Australia). The division is headed by Yakov Itskov, who previously held senior positions in the companies of the holding " base element"and the company" Rusneft ". One of the key tasks of the International Alumina Division is the production of high-quality alumina for sale on the foreign market, which requires the company to have a flexible approach to each specific consumer.
As previously reported, two divisions were also created in the Aluminum Division - East and West. The main task of the enterprises included in the Vostok Aluminum Division, whose management will be based in Krasnoyarsk, is to meet the growing demand for products from RUSAL's plants in Asia. Western facilities of the company, located in close proximity to European customers, will be focused on the production of high value-added products, including secondary alloys, for end-users in Europe and Russia.
The Commercial Directorate, which is a full-fledged business unit, was created to centralize and optimize purchases and meet the needs of the aluminum and alumina business, as well as a control center for sales of secondary products. The Commercial Directorate will also be responsible for the operational management of several enterprises supplying raw materials to the company's aluminum production: the Shanxi cathode plant in China, the Polevsk cryolite plant, the South Ural cryolite plant, SUAL-Kremniy in Shelekhov and Kamensk-Uralsky, SUAL - Powder Metallurgy » in Shelekhov, Krasnoturinsk and Volgograd, as well as the Yaroslavl GOK. Headed the commercial department Pavel Ovchinnikov, who previously held the position of Director of the Alumina Division of UC RUSAL.
The company has also formed a directorate for production development, whose main tasks are to create and develop a production system at all enterprises of the company, implement best practices to increase efficiency and unify work processes. Appointed as Production Development Director Dmitry Bondarenko, who has extensive experience in implementing the Toyota Production System (TPS) at GAZ Group OJSC.
The purpose of structural changes is to increase business efficiency by specializing each division in solving specific and clearly defined tasks, improving management processes and quickly responding to market changes, which will ensure one of the best production and financial indicators in the industry.
Curriculum vitaeMatvienko Valery Alexandrovich was born June 21, 1955. In 1977 he graduated from the Siberian Metallurgical Institute. Ordzhonikidze with a degree in metallurgical engineer (metallurgy of ferrous metals).
Since 2008, Matvienko has served as First Deputy General Director of OJSC MMC Norilsk Nickel, and was also a member of the Management Board of OJSC MMC Norilsk Nickel. From 2007 to 2008, he worked as Director for Engineering and Construction Business at UC RUSAL. From 2005 to 2007 he was CEO LLC Russian Engineering Company. In 2005, he worked as Deputy General Director for Engineering and Construction Business of LLC RUSAL - Management Company". From 2003 to 2005, he held the positions of director of the directorate for production, deputy general director for production, deputy general director for the aluminum business of LLC RUSAL - Managing Company. From 2002 to 2003, he worked as the production director of OAO Russian Aluminum Management. From 1998 to 2002, he held managerial positions at the Krasnoyarsk, Bratsk and Novokuznetsk aluminum smelters.
Itskov Yakov Yurievich was born on October 20, 1966. In 1988 he graduated from the Moscow State Mining University with a degree in mining machines and complexes. From 2009 to 2010, he held the position of First Vice President of OAO Oil and Gas Company Rusneft. From 2008 to 2009, he was General Director of BazelDorStroy LLC, from 2007 to 2008 - General Director of Design and Construction Company Transstroy LLC. From 2006 to 2007, he held the position of Managing Director of Basic Element Company LLC. From 2001 to 2006, he was the General Director of Soyuzmetallresurs CJSC, from 2000 to 2001 - Deputy Commercial Director of Russian Aluminum OJSC, from 1999 to 2000 - Deputy General Director of SibPromMarket LLC, from 1995 to 1999 he worked as Deputy Director for operational management of Alfa-Eco LLC, from 1992 to 1995 - General Director of Internauka JSC. From 1991 to 1992, he held the position of commercial director of the small enterprise "Espada".
Bondarenko Dmitry Nikolaevich was born on May 16, 1978. In 2001, he graduated from the Nizhny Novgorod State Technical University with a degree in Design of Technical and Technological Complexes. From 2001 to 2009, he held the position of Chief Specialist of LLC UK GAZ Group, where he was involved in the implementation of the Toyota Production System (TPS). Since 2009, he has headed the Production Department of the Aluminum Division of UC RUSAL.
Information about the company
RUSAL (www.rusal.ru) is the world leader in the aluminum industry. The company accounts for about 10% of world production of aluminum and 10% of alumina. The company employs about 76,000 people. RUSAL is present in 19 countries on 5 continents. The company sells its products primarily in Europe, North America, Southeast Asia, China, Japan and Korea. RUSAL ordinary shares are traded on the Hong Kong stock exchange(trading code 486). The Global Depositary Shares, representing RUSAL's ordinary shares, are traded on the NYSE Euronext Professional Market in Paris (under Regulation S, trade code: RUSAL; under Rule 144A, trade code: RUAL).
The information contained in this press release is for the media only. The information in this press release is correct at the time of publication and may change over time.
CHAPTER 1
COKING COAL.
1.1.Main trends in the development of the world coking coal market.
1.2. Current state and development prospects of the Russian coking coal market.
1.3. Review and analysis of scientific research on the problem of substantiating the production capacity of mining enterprises.
1.4. Purpose and objectives of the study.
Conclusions on chapter 1.
CHAPTER 2. FORMATION OF OPTIONS
PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF MINES AND MINES
FOR THE MINING OF COKING COAL.
2.1. The main factors that determine the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal, and the general structure of the methodology.
2.2, Determination of the possible range of changes in the production capacity of the projected enterprise.
2.3. Refinement of options for production capacities and determination of the dynamics of their development.
Conclusions on chapter 2.
CHAPTER 3. EVALUATION AND CHOICE OF OPTION
PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF COKING COAL MINING ENTERPRISES.
3.1 Analysis of the criteria for substantiating the production capacity of coal mining enterprises.
3.2 Classification and accounting of the main risk factors affecting the choice of production capacity of a coal mining enterprise.
3.3 Analysis and selection of methods for multicriteria optimization.
3.4 The procedure for selecting the option of production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal.
Conclusions on chapter 3.
COKING COAL.
4.1. General information about promising deposits of coking coals in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia).
4.2.Analysis of the coking coal market and determination of possible sales volumes of coal from the Chulmakanskoye deposit.
4.3 Formation of options for the capacities of enterprises, taking into account the dynamics of their development and development.
4.4 Evaluation and selection of the best production capacity option.
The relevance of the work. Coking coal plays an important role in the global economy, being a necessary raw material for the operation of metallurgical enterprises. At present, both globally and Russian market there is a significant shortage of coking coal of valuable grades. This leads to a significant increase in prices for this species products, and consequently - increases the attractiveness of projects for the construction of new mines and cuts for the extraction of coking coal in the eyes of domestic and foreign investors.
At the same time, the terms of construction of coal mining enterprises, even in the best case, are at least 3 years, so by the time they are launched, the coking coal market situation may change significantly, both for better and for worse. Definitely predictable
No expert can say what will happen to the market in 5-10 years. This circumstance introduces great uncertainty in investment projects, especially in terms of determining the production capacity of enterprises planned for construction. Pessimistic estimates that underestimate production capacity lead to a shortfall in profits with a favorable market development. Conversely, excessive optimism entails a sales crisis and underutilization of production capacity.
The methods of analysis traditionally used in the development of investment projects only reflect what will happen with financial results of the project with one or another change in the studied indicators, but do not contain a mechanism for choosing the best variant of production capacity. At the same time, the need for such a mechanism is very high, as it would significantly improve the quality of investment.
Efficient decisions made during the construction of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal, by taking into account the factors of uncertainty and risk. Moreover, the costs of development and operation of coking coal deposits are constantly increasing due to the deterioration of mining and geological conditions and the beginning of the development of reserves located in hard-to-reach areas of the country. Therefore, the development of a methodology for the economic justification of the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal is an urgent scientific task of great scientific and practical importance.
The purpose of the work is to develop a methodology for the economic justification of the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal, ensuring their reliable and efficient functioning in conditions of variability of the external and internal environment.
The idea of the work is to justify the production capacity according to a set of criteria in a changing market environment, taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
The object of the study are enterprises for the extraction of coking coal.
Subject of study: trends in the development of the coking coal market and the production capacity of the designed enterprises for their extraction.
Scientific provisions of the work, developed personally by the author.
1.Economic justification production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal should be carried out according to the developed methodology, including: the formation of a set of acceptable options for production capacity based on forecast scenarios for the development of the coking coal market; assessment of the generated options according to a set of criteria for various scenarios of the market functioning; selection of the best production capacity option based on the application of multi-criteria analysis methods, taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
2. Formation of options for production capacities is advisable to carry out in two stages, at the first of which, based on the developed economic and mathematical model, the permissible range of capacity change according to market demand is determined, and at the second, taking into account the planned technology and mechanization of mining operations, options are formed in the found range capacities, and also determines the possible order of their development based on the use of graph theory and dynamic programming methods.
3. Evaluation of the formed options for production capacity and selection of the best of them should be carried out using the “ideal point” method according to a set of criteria, taking into account the probabilities of implementing various scenarios for the development of the market and mining and geological conditions.
The scientific novelty of the research is as follows:
A procedure is proposed for the formation of options for the production capacities of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal based on the determination of the possible sales volumes of their products using economic and mathematical modeling;
A procedure for selecting a variant of the production capacity of an enterprise for the extraction of coking coal is proposed, which is distinguished by a multi-criteria approach and taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
The validity and reliability of scientific provisions, conclusions and recommendations are confirmed by: a representative amount of statistical information about the operation of mines and cuts and the functioning of the domestic and world coking coal markets; verification of the adequacy of the developed economic and mathematical models; correct use of the methods of probability theory, economic and mathematical modeling, linear and dynamic programming, graph theory, theory of choice and decision making; positive results of using the methodology in substantiating the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal.
The scientific significance of the work lies in the development of methodological principles for the economic justification of the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal based on the directed formation of capacity options and their comprehensive multi-criteria assessment, taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
The practical significance is to increase the efficiency and sustainability of the operation of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal in an unstable market environment through the adoption of reasonable design solutions in determining the main parameters of coal mines and open pits under construction and reconstruction.
Approbation of work. The main provisions of the dissertation work were reported at the seminars of the Department of Organization and Management in the Mining Industry of the Moscow State Mining University (2004-2005), at Trailing LLC (Vereinsky coal mine), at the seminar within the framework of the Miner's Week (2005).
The main results and conclusions obtained by the author:
1. The relevance, complex nature and specific features problems of substantiation of production capacity in the design of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal in the conditions of a changing conjuncture of the domestic and world markets and the constantly becoming more complex parameters of the developed deposits.
2. An analysis of the factors (natural, technical, organizational, regulatory, economic, etc.) influencing the choice of the production capacity of a coal mining enterprise was carried out, their relationship was established, and on this basis the staged procedure for substantiating production capacity in market conditions was determined.
3. An economic justification for the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal is proposed to be carried out according to the developed methodology, including: formation of production capacity options; assessment of the generated options according to a set of criteria under various scenarios of market development; selection of the best variant of production capacity by the method of multi-criteria optimization, taking into account the factors of uncertainty and risk.
4. A procedure has been developed for generating options for production capacities, including: determining the permissible range of capacity changes according to market demand based on the developed economic and mathematical model; formation in the found range of options for the capacities of the enterprise, depending on the planned technology and mechanization of mining operations; determination of a rational variant of production capacity for each market development scenario based on the use of graph theory and dynamic programming methods.
5. It has been established that the assessment of the formed options for production capacity and the selection of the best of them should be carried out using the “ideal point” method according to a set of criteria, taking into account the probabilities of implementing various scenarios for the development of the market and the mining and geological situation.
6. A procedure for a multi-criteria assessment of the generated options for the production capacity of an enterprise for the extraction of coking coal is proposed, including: compiling a list of criteria by which options should be evaluated and the best of them selected; determination of criteria weights; calculation of evaluation criteria values for each power option under consideration; normalization of criteria values; determination of parameters of an ideal point; calculation of the values of the complex criterion for power options and the choice of the best of them.
7. It is shown that the use of the developed methodology for the formation of options for the production capacity of the Chulmakanskaya mine allows increasing the internal rate of return of the enterprise compared to the existing design option by 0.73%, and the net present value - by 6.3% (265.22 million rub.).
Conclusion
In the dissertation work, a new solution is given to an urgent scientific and practical problem - the development of a methodology for the economic justification of the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal in the face of uncertainty in the development of the internal and external environment.
1. Agoshkov M.I., Goldman E.JT. Economic criteria for assessing the optimal values of mining parameters. -M., Mining magazine, 1988, No. 4.
2. Azoev G.L. Formation of marketing technologies for managing organizations in a competitive environment. //Abstract dis. for the competition account step, Doctor of Economics-M., 1997.
3. Astakhov A.S., Gitin E.M. Economic and mathematical methods for determining the most profitable production capacity of mines in current and long-term planning (on the example of the Karaganda coal basin). Edition IGD them. A.A. Skochinsky, M., 1967.
4. Astakhov A.S., Pyatkin A.M., Gitin E.M. etc. Production capacity of coal mines. M., "Nedra", 1975.
5. Astakhov A.S., Krasnyansky G.L., Malyshev Yu.N., Yanovsky A.B. Economics of a mining enterprise. Mining microeconomics. -M., Academy of Mining Sciences, 1997, p.279.
6. Ashikhmin A.A. Development and adoption of managerial decisions: formal models and methods of choice. -M., MGGU, 1995.
7. Bakanov M.I., Sheremet A.D. Theory economic analysis. M.: Finance and statistics, 2002. - 416 p.
8. Berens V., Havranek P.M. Guidelines for the preparation of industrial feasibility studies / Per. from English. Moscow: Interexpert, 1995. - 342 p.
9. Bigel J. Production management. Quantitative approach. / Per. from English / Ed. V.Ya. Altaeva, B.T. Vavilov. -M., Mir, 1973.
10. Yu.Bochkai. T. Economic risk and methods of its measurement. Translation from Hung. -M., Economics, 1979. 183s.
11. Wentzel E.S. Probability Theory. -M., Higher school, 1998.
12. Virula M.A. Competition and competitiveness of coal mining enterprises - M.: MGGU, 1996.
13. Temporary Guidelines on the Content, Design and Procedure for Submitting Feasibility Studies for Mineral Raw Materials for State Expertise. M., Pricelist, 1998.
14. Gitin E.M. Study of the issues of determining the optimal production capacity of existing coal mines (on the example of the Karaganda coal basin). //Abstract dis. for the competition account step, Ph.D. A.A.Skochinsky, -M., 1966.
15. Gitin E.M., Golberg Ya.B. Justification of the term production capacity. The main problems of the coal industry. M., ed. TsNIEIugol, 1982, p. 33-37.
16. Mining. Terminological dictionary(editor-in-chief N.V. Melnikov). Third edition, revised and enlarged. M. Nedra, 1981 S.219,220.
17. Mountain Encyclopedia. Volume 4. M., Publishing house "Soviet Encyclopedia", 1989, pp. 252,253.
18. Grabovy P.G. etc. Risks in modern business. -M., Alane, 1994.
19. Greshilov A.A., Stakun V.A., Stakun A.A. Mathematical methods for constructing forecasts. -M., "Radio and communication", 1997.
20. Gribov V.D., Gruzinov V.P. Enterprise economy. M.: Finance and statistics, 2003. - 336 p.
21. Evstrakhin V.A., Prokofieva JI.M., Koshelev A.P. Mineral resources of Russia. Issue 2. Fuel and energy raw materials: oil, natural gas, coal, uranium, oil shale, peat. Moscow: Geoinformmark, 1997.
22. V. M. Eremeev, Yu. S. Grigoriev, K. Yu. Grigoriev, N. B. Izygzon, E. V. Petrenko, I. S. Peshkov, A. A. Rozhkov, and G. Mortal O.S. Design of coal mines, cuts and processing plants. M., "Nedra communications LTD", 2000. p.312.
23. Zhura A.V. Economic substantiation of sales volumes of coking coals during the formation of the production program of a coal mining company. // Diss. for the competition account step, Ph.D. -M., 2000.
24. Zvyagin P.Z. The choice of power and service life of coal mines. M., 1963.
25. Instructions for determining the production capacity of coal and shale mines and quarries. Gosplan of the USSR, M, 1963.
26. Instructions for calculating the production capacities of existing industrial enterprises Ministry of the coal industry of the USSR. M., ed. TsNIEIugol, 1979.
27. Instructions for calculating the production capacities of operating enterprises for the extraction and processing of coal (shale), approved by order of the Ministry of Fuel and Energy Russian Federation dated July 15, 1993, No. 164.
28. Kvitka V.V., Arsentiev A.I. Minimization of the integral risk criterion when choosing the productivity of a quarry. Design of open and underwater field development: Interuniversity. Sat. -JT., LGI, 1982. p.39.
29. Kil'deshov G.S., Frenkel' A.A. Time series analysis and forecasting. -M., Statistics, 1973.
30. Kleiner B.G. Risks of industrial enterprises (how to reduce and compensate them). Russian Economic Journal, 1994, No. 5-6, pp. 85-93.
31. Kleiner G.B., Tambovtsev V.L., Kachalov R.M. Enterprise in unstable economic environment: risks, strategy, security. -M., Economics, 1997.-287p.
32. Klimov S.L., Kovalchuk A.B., Ponomarev V.P. socially economic problems coal-mining regions of Russia - M.: Alfa - Montan Bureau, 1998. - 225 p.
33. Kovalchuk A.B., Ponomarev V.P. Economic situation Russian coal industry after the first stage of restructuring (1994-1998) and for the long term. M.: INP RAN, 2000. -45 p.
34. Kozlovsky E.A. Mineral and raw material problems of Russia on the eve of the 21st century. M .: Russian Biographical Institute with the participation of the publishing house of the Moscow State Mining University, 1999.
35. Krasnyansky G.L. Design economic mechanism functioning of the coal industry in the context of industry restructuring. //Abstract dis. for the competition account step, doctor of economics -M.: MGGU, 1994.- 32 p.
36. Krasnyansky G.L. Economic aspects of the development of the fuel and energy complex of Russia. M.: Publishing house AGN. 2000.
37. Kuznetsov K.K., Eremeev V.M. Efficiency of development of design indicators of coal mines. M., "Nedra", 1985. p.247.
38. Lukashin Yu.P. Adaptive methods of short-term forecasting. M.: "Statistics", 1979.
39. Lewis K.D. Forecasting methods economic indicators. -M., "Finance and statistics", 1986.
40. McConnell K.R., Brew S.L. Economics: principles, problems and politics. In 2.t./G1er. from English. Bishkek: Turan, 1997.
41. Malyshev Yu.N. Zaidenvarg V.E. and others. Restructuring of the coal industry (theory, experience, programs, forecast) / / M .: Company Rosugol, 1996, 536s.
42. Malyshev Yu.N. Resource base of the Russian coal industry and prospects for its development. Int. symposium "Fuel and energy resources of Russia and other CIS countries" (addition to the main volume). St. Petersburg, 1995, No. 5-10.
43. Marshall A. Principles of economic science / In 3 volumes - M .: Progress, 1993.-254 p.
44. Matveev M.T., Tsetsokha L.V. Determination of the production capacity of mines, taking into account the probabilistic nature of coal mining processes. Edition of the Ukrainian branch of NIIPiN under the State Planning Committee of the CCC. Kyiv, 1969.
46. Mineral raw materials. Coal / V.A. Kosinsky, Yu.N. Kornilov, E.I. Polyakovskaya et al. // Handbook. JSC "Geoinformmark", 1997.
47. Mineral resource base of the Russian coal industry, (state, dynamics, development), in 2 volumes. Moscow, MGGU, 1999.
48. Modeling of national economic processes / Ed. V.S.Dadayan.- M.: Economics, 1973.-479 p.
49. Moroz V.P. Economic substantiation of strategic decisions in the open mining of complex structure coal deposits. // Diss. for the competition account step, Ph.D. -M., MGGU, 1996.
50. Morris W. Management Science. Bayesian approach. -M., Mir, 1981.
51. Moskvin V.B. Study economic efficiency reduction of terms of development of design capacity by coal mines. // Diss. for the competition account step, Ph.D. -M., 1969.
52. Mossakovsky Ya.V. Economic efficiency assessment capital investments in the mining industry. M., MGGU, 1995.
53. Mushik E., Muller P. Acceptance methods technical solutions/ per. with him. N.V. Vasilchenko, V.A. Dushsky. -M., Mir, 1990, 204 p.
54. Petrosov A.A. Strategic planning and forecasting: Proc. allowance. -M., MGGU, 2001. 464p.
55. Petrosov A.A., Bludidin N.M. Basics of forecasting mining production: Tutorial. M.: MGI, 1980, 87p.
56. Podolyan V. I. Mineral resource base and prospects for the development of coal mining in the Far East economic region/ / Sat Geology of coal deposits - Issue 5 Yekaterinburg UGGGA, 1995.
57. Ponomarev V.P. Economic fundamentals strategic development of the Russian coal industry. //Dis. for the competition account step, doctor of economics M.: MGGU, 2000. - 247 p.
58. Design of coal mines, cuts and processing plants. Under general edition Petrenko E.V. Edition "Nedra communi-keys LTD", M., 1999.
59. Rainsberg B.A. Market economy: Textbook. -M. Journal. "Business life", 1993.-192p.
60. Develop criteria and methodological foundations for the environmental assessment of coal mines and technological processes of mining / IGD im. A.A.Skochinsky. -Lyubertsy, 1990, 80s.
61. Develop a regulatory and methodological manual on the environmental and economic part of the EIA of the designed enterprises and the choice of environmental best option construction from alternative design solutions / VNIIOSugol. -Permian. 1991, 67p.
62. Develop technical and economic requirements for technological processes and equipment of the mine according to the factor "Land resources", providing for rational use / VNIIOSugol. - Perm, 1990, -84s.
63. Develop environmental requirements for technological processes and equipment of the mine and standards for maximum permissible emissions of harmful substances into the atmosphere / VNIIOSugol. - Perm, 1990, 75s.
64. Revazov M.A. Problems and prospects of the economy of mining enterprises in modern conditions. M., MGGU. 1994, 150 pp.
65. Regions of Russia: Statistical collection in 2 volumes. Goskomstat of Russia. M., 1998-2004.
66. Reznichenko S.S. Multi-criteria optimization of the tasks of organization, planning and management of mining production. -M., MGI, 1989, 90 p.
67. Reznichenko S.S., Ashikhmin A.A. Mathematical methods and modeling in the mining industry. -M., MGGU, 1997.
68. Reznichenko S.S., Podolsky M.P., Ashikhmin A.A. Economic-mathematical methods and modeling in planning and management of mining production. M., Nedra, 1991.
69. Romanov S.M. Formation of a marketing strategy for a coal company in the domestic market. //Abstract dis. for the competition account step, Ph.D., -M., 1999.
70. S. M. Romanov and Ya. Yu. Factors of development of the world coal market. // On Sat. Management in the mining industry. Materials of the round table "Miner's Week 2005" - M .: MIGEK LLC, 2005. -S.132-139;
71. Russia in numbers. 1996-2004. Brief statistical collection. Goskomstat of Russia. M., 1996-2004.
72. Salamatin A.G. State and problems of development of the coal industry in Russia. // Mountain Bulletin. 2000.
73. Selezneva D.A. Economic substantiation of operational production programs of stone processing enterprises. // Diss. for the competition account step, Ph.D. -M., 2005.
74. Socio-economic situation in Russia. M., Goskomstat, 1994-2004.
75. Sukhoruchenkov A.I., Evsin V.G., Kornilov N.P. O public policy in the development of the mineral resource base of ferrous metallurgy. -M., Mining magazine, 2000, No. 1.
76. Tverdokhlebov V.F. "Coal resource base of Russia: state and development prospects". Social and business magazine "Energy Policy", 1999, issue 3.
77. Trubetskoy K.I., Peshkov A.A., Matsko I.A. Methods for evaluating the effectiveness of investments of mining enterprises // Mining Journal, 1993, No. 2, pp. 3-11.
78. Coal base of Russia. Volume V. Book 2. Coal basins and deposits of the Far East (Republic of Sakha, Northeast, Sakhalin Island, Kamchatka Peninsula). M.: ZOA "Geoiformmark", 1999.
79. Coal industry of the Russian Federation. Statistical collection. - M .: Ministry of Energy of the Russian Federation, ZAO Rosinformugol, 1994-2004.
80. Fishburne Peter S. Theory of utility for decision making. M., Nauka, 1978,352 p.
81. Von Neumann J. and Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behavior. -M., Nauka, 1970.
82. Friedman, JI. Savage. Analysis of choice under risk. Russian Economic Journal, 1993, No. 9, pp. 107-118.
83. Chetyrkin E.M. Statistical forecasting methods. -M., Statistics, 1975.
84. Sheremet L.D. Theory of economic analysis. M.: INFRA-M, 2002.-333 p.
85. Shchadov M.I., Artemiev V.B., Shchadov V.M., Gagarin S.G., Eremin I.V., Klimov C.JT, Lisurenko A.V., Netsvetaev A.G. Natural potential of fossil coals. Rational use of their organic matter. M.: "Nedra Communications LTD", 2000.
86. Shchadov M.I. Ecological and economic substantiation of technological solutions for open-pit mining of flat coal deposits. //Abstract dis. for the competition account step, Ph.D. -M., 1994. -18 p.
87. Enterprise Economics / Ed. V.Ya.Gorfinkel, V.A. Schwander. -3rd ed. M.: Unity - Dana, 2003.-718 p.
88. Yanovsky A.B. Fundamentals of the restructuring of the coal industry.-M.: Nedra, 1995, 135p.
89. Yastrebinsky M.A., Gitis L.Kh. "Efficiency of Investments in Mining Enterprises: The Time Factor and Cost Discounting". -M., MGGU, 1993.
90. Annual Energy Outlook 2003. Energy Information Administration. U.S. Department of Energy. Washington, 2003.
91. Coal Information. 1998-2004. OECD/IEA. Paris, 1998-2005.
92. McCloskey's Metallurgical Coal Quarterly. A quarterly analysis and forecast of demand for and supply of metallurgical coal. Quarter Mr., 2005. The McCloskey's Group Ltd. UK, 2005.
Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for review and obtained through recognition of the original texts of dissertations (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors related to the imperfection of recognition algorithms. AT PDF files dissertations and abstracts that we deliver, there are no such errors.
"RusAl" after the closure of aluminum production at its enterprises in Sverdlovsk region continues to invest in their development. The BAZ and UAZ plants are profitable and are starting to increase the output of alumina. In addition, RusAl does not exclude the possibility of resuming aluminum production at one of its plants in the region. The director of the alumina division of OK RusAl, Yakov Itskov, spoke about the current state of the plants in the Sverdlovsk region and production plans in an interview with the Interfax-Ural agency.
Could you generally characterize the situation at RusAl's Sverdlovsk enterprises? Are there any plans to close or reduce production capacity? Are cuts expected at enterprises?
Today, Bogoslovsky (BAZ) and Uralsky (UAZ) aluminum smelters, SUBR and silicon production are operating in the Sverdlovsk Region. In general, the enterprises work stably. The extraction of bauxites and the production of other types of products are carried out in accordance with the business plan. No shortened working weeks are planned at any of the enterprises.
If we talk about personnel, then at UAZ we even expect an increase in the number of employees. The BAZ is recruiting for vacancies that arise at the enterprise in connection with the increase in the volume of alumina production. In addition, we have submitted an application for participation in the organization of a leading vocational training and internships for employees in order to further recruit vacancies, which, among other things, will be created in the Bogoslovsky industrial park.
As for the SUBR, the phased commissioning of new complexes of the Cheremukhovskaya-Glubokaya mine will remove the issue of employment for the North Urals people for the next 35-40 years.
Are you considering the possibility of restoring aluminum production at BAZ and UAZ in the medium term (3-5 years)?
The issue of restoring aluminum production at BAZ is not being considered. Outdated energy-intensive equipment, together with high electricity tariffs, make production uncompetitive.
At UAZ, the situation is different. With a long-term and significant increase in the price of aluminum, as well as the decision to reduce the price of electricity, we do not rule out the launch of the two most modern buildings.
- Is production at BAZ and UAZ profitable today?
Yes it is. For five months of the current year, the profitability of sales of BAZ products amounted to 7%, UAZ - 11%. For example, at UAZ, the plan for the production of alumina was fulfilled for January-May 2015 by 100.3%. More than 319,000 tons of alumina were produced and sent to RusAl's Siberian enterprises.
- What are the volumes of alumina production at BAZ and UAZ?
At the end of 2014, the volume of alumina production at BAZ amounted to just over 911 thousand tons. This year we plan to produce about 940-950 thousand tons. UAZ now produces 770,000 tons of alumina. By 2016, thanks to the implementation of the program for the modernization of alumina production, it is planned to increase this figure to 900 thousand tons, and in the future - up to 1 million tons per year.
Earlier, the company announced the launch of a $23 billion modernization program at UAZ. When is the modernization planned? What exactly is planned to be done.
The project for the modernization of alumina production at UAZ was launched this year and is designed to increase production to 900 thousand tons of alumina by the end of 2016. It provides for the construction of a new autoclave battery and two new decomposers, the installation of heat exchangers, and the modernization of an electrical substation. Increasing the production of its own alumina is an important step towards reducing RusAl's costs for imported alumina.
In addition to alumina, BAZ planned to produce about 100 tons of anti-corrosion protectors this year. How many products have been produced so far? Are there orders and who are the customers?
chief competitive advantage BASE is his 20 years of experience in the production of aluminum protectors. Many technical developments, production technology and chemical composition of the alloys are protected by various patents. Due to this, there is a steady increase in interest in this product from the oil and gas and military-industrial complexes, including such companies as Tatneft, Sevmash and Admiralty Shipyards.
By the way, the portfolio of orders for 2015 has already been fully formed, and we are accepting applications for 2016. Currently, 24 tons of brand protectors have been produced. Most of the shipment is scheduled for the second half of the year, which is associated with the timing of the repairs of oil storage facilities and the opening of financing at defense enterprises.
Our main competitors in this market are CJSC AK Radikal (Chelyabinsk) and CJSC PPMTS Permsnabsbyt.
What factory is the aluminum for the protectors currently supplied from? To what extent is it economically justified?
Mostly from the Sayanogorsk aluminum plant. The fact is that even taking into account transportation, the cost of aluminum from Siberian plants remains lower than the cost of aluminum at BAZ. The reason is the high tariffs for electricity in the Urals.
We have already talked about the fact that BAZ and UAZ are building sludge storage facilities. Change economic situation did not affect the timing and cost of the project?
Despite the economic situation, neither the cost nor the timing of the construction of sludge storage facilities has changed.
At UAZ, we plan to put into operation new card a sludge dump with a capacity of 3.9 million cubic meters by the end of 2015. Moreover, we have already started preparatory work for the construction of another sludge dump with a capacity of more than 32 million cubic meters. Taking into account the work of other sludge dumps, the new facilities will allow UAZ to solve the issues of safe storage of alumina production waste for at least 25 years. The construction of a sludge storage facility at the BAZ is also ongoing. The second phase of construction is scheduled for completion in 2016.
Let's move on to another of your enterprises in the Urals - SUBR. What are the volumes of bauxite production at SUBR, what are the plans for the current year? Where is the raw material supplied? Are there export shipments?
In 2014, SUBR produced 2.8 million tons of bauxite. From January to March 2015 - 616 thousand tons against the plan of 608 thousand tons. In general, the business plan for this year provides for the production of 2.5 million tons. We do not export bauxite abroad, but mainly supply BAZ. This year it was decided to supply 200,000 tons to the Achinsk Alumina Refinery.
In 2015, the first stage of the new Cheremukhovskaya-Glubokaya mine was put into operation. The launch of the 2nd and 3rd phases is planned for 2016 and 2017. Are these plans still valid? Can something affect the postponement of input?
At the moment, work on the second and third phases is proceeding according to plan.
What is the current credit load of the Sverdlovsk enterprises of "RusAl"? Are there any loans attracted from foreign banks?
As of today, BAZ, UAZ and SUBR do not have a credit load or borrowings from foreign banks.
Social programs at BAZ, UAZ and SUBR have been preserved in full, regardless of the economic situation. In 2014, more than 360 million rubles were spent on social programs for employees of Ural enterprises, and this year the figure will only increase.
We have increased the subsidy for food for employees of our enterprises from 70 to 90 rubles per shift. As part of social programs, measures are being taken to improve the health of workers in sanatoriums, summer children's holidays for the children of workers, and non-state lifetime pensions for participants in the Great Patriotic War.
In Severouralsk, at the expense of the company, two sports halls were repaired, in which 670 employees of the company regularly work out in eight sections. In addition, for employees, their children and veterans of the enterprise, swimming groups were organized in the pool of the sanatorium-dispensary "Silver Meridian".
The BAZ also contains social facilities that have a city-wide value for Krasnoturyinsk. These are the Palace of Culture, the swimming pool and the House of Sports. The expected costs for the maintenance of these facilities in 2015 will amount to 30 million rubles.
In 2015, in the RusAl Territory social program competition in Krasnoturinsk, 8 socially significant projects worth more than 4 million rubles were awarded grants. And in Kamensk-Uralsky in 2014, more than 4 .5 million rubles In 2015, more than 1.4 million rubles were allocated to support 5 projects, in September Kamenets will submit several more projects for the competition and expect to receive additional grants.
To narrow the search results, you can refine the query by specifying the fields to search on. The list of fields is presented above. For example:
You can search across multiple fields at the same time:
The default operator is AND.
Operator AND means that the document must match all the elements in the group:
research development
Operator OR means that the document must match one of the values in the group:
study OR development
Operator NOT excludes documents containing this element:
study NOT development
When writing a query, you can specify the way in which the phrase will be searched. Four methods are supported: search based on morphology, without morphology, search for a prefix, search for a phrase.
By default, the search is based on morphology.
To search without morphology, it is enough to put the "dollar" sign before the words in the phrase:
$ study $ development
To search for a prefix, you need to put an asterisk after the query:
study *
To search for a phrase, you need to enclose the query in double quotes:
" research and development "
To include synonyms of a word in the search results, put a hash mark " #
" before a word or before an expression in brackets.
When applied to one word, up to three synonyms will be found for it.
When applied to a parenthesized expression, a synonym will be added to each word if one was found.
Not compatible with no-morphology, prefix, or phrase searches.
# study
Parentheses are used to group search phrases. This allows you to control the boolean logic of the request.
For example, you need to make a query: find documents whose author is Ivanov or Petrov, and the title contains the words research or development:
For an approximate search, you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of a word in a phrase. For example:
bromine ~
The search will find words such as "bromine", "rum", "prom", etc.
You can optionally specify the maximum number of possible edits: 0, 1, or 2. For example:
bromine ~1
The default is 2 edits.
To search by proximity, you need to put a tilde " ~ " at the end of a phrase. For example, to find documents with the words research and development within 2 words, use the following query:
" research development "~2
To change the relevance of individual expressions in the search, use the sign " ^
" at the end of an expression, and then indicate the level of relevance of this expression in relation to the others.
The higher the level, the more relevant the given expression.
For example, in this expression, the word "research" is four times more relevant than the word "development":
study ^4 development
By default, the level is 1. Valid values are a positive real number.
To specify the interval in which the value of some field should be, you should specify the boundary values in brackets, separated by the operator TO.
A lexicographic sort will be performed.
Such a query will return results with the author starting from Ivanov and ending with Petrov, but Ivanov and Petrov will not be included in the result.
To include a value in an interval, use square brackets. Use curly braces to escape a value.
$W4~
The relevance of the work. Coking coal plays an important role in the global economy, being a necessary raw material for the operation of metallurgical enterprises. At present, both the world and the Russian market experience a significant shortage of coking coals of valuable grades. This causes a significant increase in prices for this type of product, and therefore increases the attractiveness of projects for the construction of new mines and cuts for the extraction of coking coals in the eyes of domestic and foreign investors .
At the same time, the terms of construction of coal mining enterprises, even in the best case, are at least 3 years, so by the time they are launched, the coking coal market situation may change significantly, both for better and for worse. No expert can unequivocally predict what will happen to the market in 5-10 years. This circumstance introduces great uncertainty in investment projects, especially in terms of determining the production capacity of enterprises planned for construction. Pessimistic estimates that underestimate production capacity lead to a shortfall in profits if the market develops favorably. Conversely, excessive optimism entails a sales crisis and underutilization of production capacity.
The methods of analysis traditionally used in the development of investment projects only reflect what will happen to the financial results of the project with one or another change in the indicators under study, but do not contain a mechanism for choosing the best variant of production capacity. At the same time, the need for such a mechanism is very high, since it would significantly improve the quality investment decisions taken in the construction of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal, by taking into account the factors of uncertainty and risk. Gem more than the cost of developing and operating coking coal deposits
constantly increase due to worsening conditions and
EI6LIOTEKAі
melt due to the deterioration of the orno-geological conditions and the beginning of the development of reserves located in hard-to-reach areas of the country. Therefore, the development of a methodology for the economic justification of the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal is an urgent scientific task of great scientific and practical importance.
Objective is to develop a methodology for the economic justification of the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal, ensuring their reliable and efficient functioning in conditions of variability of the external and internal environment.
Job idea is to justify the production capacity according to a set of criteria in a changing market environment, taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
Object of study are enterprises for the extraction of coking coal.
Subject of study: trends in the development of the coking coal market and the production capacity of the planned enterprises for their extraction.
Scientific provisions of the work, developed personally by the author.
І. The economic justification of the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal should be carried out according to the developed methodology, including: the formation of a set of acceptable options for production capacity based on forecast scenarios for the development of the coking coal market; assessment of the generated options according to a set of criteria for various scenarios of the market functioning; selection of the best production capacity option based on the application of multi-criteria analysis methods, taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
2. Formation of production capacity options is advisable to carry out in two stages, at the first of which, based on the developed economic and mathematical model, the permissible range of capacity change according to market demand is determined, and at the second, taking into account the planned
my technology and mechanization of mining operations - in the range found, power options are formed, and a possible order for their development is determined on the basis of using graph theory and dynamic programming methods.
3 Evaluation of the generated options for production power and and selection of the best of them should be carried out using the "ideal point" method according to a set of criteria, taking into account the probabilities of implementing various scenarios for the development of the market and mining and geological conditions.
Scientific novelty of the research consists of the following:
a procedure for the formation of options for production powerful enterprises for the extraction of coking coal is proposed based on determining the possible sales volumes of their products using economic and mathematical modeling;
a procedure for selecting a variant of the production capacity of an enterprise for the extraction of coking coal is proposed, which is distinguished by a multicriteria approach and taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
Validity and reliability of scientific provisions, conclusions and recommendations is confirmed by: a representative volume of statistical information about the operation of mines and cuts and the functioning of the domestic and world coking coal markets, checking the adequacy of the developed economic and mathematical models; correct use of the methods of probability theory, economic and mathematical modeling, linear and dynamic programming, graph theory, theory of choice and decision making, positive results of using the methodology in substantiating the production capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal.
scientific significance work sosioi in the development of methodological principles for the economic justification and related capacity of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal on the basis of the directed formation of capacity options and their comprehensive multi-criteria assessment, taking into account uncertainty and risk factors.
Practical value is to increase the efficiency and sustainability of the functioning of enterprises for the extraction of coking coal in an unstable market environment by making informed project decisions when determining the key parameters of coal mines and open pits under construction and reconstruction.
Approbation of work. The main provisions of the dissertation work were reported at the seminars of the Department of Organization and Management in the Mining Industry of the Moscow State Mining University (2004-2005), at Trailing LLC (Vereinsky coal mine), at the seminar within the framework of the Miner's Week (20051).
Publications. Based on the research results, 3 scientific papers were published.
Scope and structure of work. The dissertation consists of an introduction, four chapters, a conclusion, contains 18 figures, 25 tables and a bibliography of 98 titles.
