Connect with us

affilate software business

Tech

New Orleans Battle Fought Anew: Fossil Fuel vs. Clean Power

Published

on


NEW ORLEANS — Susan Guidry stepped up as a volunteer in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, helping clear debris from the streets as part of a group calling itself the Katrina Krewe. She saw firsthand the disaster’s toll, including the crippling of the power supply. When voters elected her to the City Council, she said, she hardly knew what a kilowatt was. But she came to the conclusion that the city had to change its approach to energy.

“As fragile as New Orleans is with climate change, hurricanes, sea-level rise, I just started researching,” Ms. Guidry said. “That was a lot of hard learning.”

What she found out led her into battle over a question central to the climate debate. Is it wise to keep building fossil-fuel plants — even those powered by natural gas rather than coal — that will be in operation for decades? Or are wind turbines and solar farms now reliable and economical enough to take their place?

Ms. Guidry began her homework after a subsidiary of Entergy — a major utility in a state heavily reliant on the oil and gas industry — said it needed to build a new natural-gas plant to replace an outdated unit in the New Orleans East neighborhood. When the issue arose in 2015, “that probably sounded fine to me,” said Ms. Guidry, whose district hugged the city’s western boundary. “There was solar power, there was wind, whatever. It all seemed a bit ahead in time for that to be sufficient for us.”

But in the course of briefings by city advisers, she began to raise questions. “About a year into it,” she said, “I was like, wait a minute, this is not a good idea.”

A retired trial lawyer who worked on civil litigation, Ms. Guidry began reading books, searching the internet, seeking out experts, finding out how other states and cities were addressing their needs. “Having a legal background,” she said, “you’re prone to search for the facts.”

The advisers had told her that the regional grid operator was requiring the gas plant. The grid operator told her otherwise. Entergy said that solar and wind power were inadequate because the sun does not always shine and the wind does not always blow, and that the associated cost of battery storage was too high. But she saw the economics changing.

Even with environmental concerns and mounting community opposition, Ms. Guidry was the sole dissenter when the council approved the plant in 2017. “It was very clear we were fighting a utility that wanted to live in the Dark Ages,” she said.

Now, with the project well underway, the opponents have a chance for a do-over. In July, a judge voided the council’s decision, ruling that proponents had used illegal means to win approval — specifically, that actors had been hired to pack a crucial City Council meeting and voice support.

The judge has ordered a new vote. The council is fighting the ruling. Ms. Guidry will not be part of any reconsideration, having left the council last year. But however the struggle plays out, it is being mirrored across the country.

Utility companies are investing tens of billions of dollars in natural-gas plants, insisting that renewables aren’t ready to serve as the primary source of electricity, while environmentalists and many states are pushing back against that argument.

In Virginia, Dominion Energy has proposed as many as 13 new natural-gas plants. In Florida, TECO Energy won approval to replace a coal-fired power plant with natural gas, even as a bigger utility in the state is building the world’s largest energy storage facility as part of a big investment in renewable sources. In California, the power-plant developer AES received approval in 2017 to build new gas-power plants in Long Beach and Huntington Beach, despite protests from residents and consumer advocates calling for carbon-free energy sources.

But as cities and states increasingly issue mandates for 100 percent carbon-free electricity by the middle of the century, California and Arizona are planning or have built renewable-energy projects for less than the cost of natural-gas plants like the one approved in New Orleans.

“Many utilities continue to sell the story that gas is the bridge that we need right now to the clean energy future,” said Bill Corcoran, a director of state strategies for the Sierra Club, which has surveyed gas-plant projects across the country. “I think this is about locking in as much as you can now.”

Entergy New Orleans, a subsidiary of a power company with 2.9 million customers across Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas and Texas, had built a reputation in town for its reluctance to embrace clean energy.

The utility said it needed the gas plant to replace an old, inefficient unit at its Michoud plant, just south of Interstate 10 and Lake Pontchartrain in largely African-American and Vietnamese-American neighborhoods. The utility argued that the replacement plant — known as a peaker, referring to times of high demand — would help ensure that the city had electricity during the Gulf Coast’s muggy summer days, or if access to power elsewhere in Louisiana or from neighboring states were lost during a disaster or some other event.

“They never really looked at any alternatives,” said Monique Harden, an assistant director of the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, which has brought lawsuits to stop the project.

The natural-gas plant depended on City Council approval, and at a crucial public hearing in October 2017, dozens of supporters crowded the room bearing signs and dressed in T-shirts saying “Clean Energy. Good Jobs. Reliable Power.” Several testified in support of the plant, and the group filled so many hearing seats that opponents could not get in to speak against it.

The project was approved a few months later. But a complaint filed by Ms. Harden’s organization with federal tax authorities asserted that the nonprofit Entergy Charitable Foundation had “recruited recipients of its charitable donations to take public positions in support of the proposed gas plant as a quid pro quo exchange for the donations, as well as lobby the New Orleans City Council.”

Keith Keough, who had moved to New Orleans from Durham, N.C., was among those responding to an ad on Facebook that sought actors to participate in a commercial. The ad promised $40 for showing up, sitting in a room and wearing a T-shirt. Those willing to read a script during the meeting received as much as $200.

“I was pretty much homeless and needed the money,” said Mr. Keough, 41. “They gave us these orange shirts. When we went in the City Council building, they told us not to talk to any of the reporters.”

Afterward, he said, he received $40 plus some money for food when he and about 40 others gathered at the local Dave & Buster’s to receive their payments.

The exercise in astroturfing — a seemingly grass-roots effort with manufactured support — led a local judge to void the approval of the plant, calling use of the paid actors a violation of public-meetings laws. The council is seeking to have the judge’s decision overturned.

An appellate decision in the council’s favor would move the $210 million construction project closer to completion by the January target date for operation. If the project is blocked, someone would have to cover the $96 million already spent on it. If the utility has its way, ratepayers would pay $960 million over the 50-year life of the plant as the power company pockets tens of millions of dollars in profits.

“I still think that people’s rights were violated by not being able to participate in the proceeding,” said Logan Atkinson Burke, executive director of the Alliance for Affordable Energy, a nonprofit consumer-advocacy organization based in New Orleans. “I think the law is squarely on the people’s side.”

An Entergy official said in an interview that a subcontractor, without the company’s knowledge, had paid actors to appear in support of the power plant. The utility said it had fired the public-relations firm involved.

On a reporter’s recent visit to City Hall, one councilwoman declined to discuss the gas plant, citing pending litigation, while aides to the six other council members were unresponsive to requests for comment.

Until the recession a decade ago, coal-fired power plants generated almost half of all electricity in the country. But power from natural-gas plants surged as fracking produced an abundant supply of the fuel.

At the end of 2018, about a third of the nation’s electricity was coming from natural gas and a little more than a quarter from coal. Renewable sources like wind, solar and hydroelectric plants produced 18 percent of the electricity and nuclear 19 percent, according to data from the federal Energy Information Administration.

Along the way, Entergy put forward its New Orleans proposal. But critics argue that the economics have changed since then, and that solar power, combined with energy storage, offers competitive prices. They say that is especially true of a plant like the New Orleans project, aimed at periods of peak demand, which might require it to operate only 20 percent of the year or less.

In a September report, the Rocky Mountain Institute, a nonprofit environmental research organization, said the utility industry was set to spend $70 billion on development of natural-gas power plants through the mid-2020s, while pouring money into electricity production from clean energy would save $29 billion and reduce carbon emissions by 100 million tons a year.

Neal Kirby, an Entergy spokesman, said as the need for the power plant became apparent, a gas facility was the best option. He said renewable-energy plants had become less expensive than some projects but added, “That wasn’t the case a few years ago.”

The first came in 2017, when Tucson Electric Power announced an agreement to build a solar-and-storage facility capable of producing power for 4.5 cents a kilowatt-hour — more than a third less than a cost estimate offered by an Entergy representative during hearings on the New Orleans project. (Entergy said the testimony was not specifically for the New Orleans site but declined to give any other calculation, citing “business-sensitive” information.) The average electricity customer in the United States pays 13.34 cents a kilowatt-hour, according the federal Energy Information Administration.

In June, Nevada’s main utility, NV Energy, announced projects that will include solar and storage at less than 4 cents a kilowatt-hour, including what is projected to be the largest solar farm in the United States.

And in September, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power approved a proposal by the developer 8minute Solar Energy to build a large-scale solar farm with energy storage on 2,650 acres in the Mojave Desert for less than 4 cents a kilowatt-hour and possibly less than 2 cents, according to Mayor Eric Garcetti.

The low-cost solar-and-storage projects sometimes rely on creative accounting, taking advantage of federal tax subsidies by applying a tax credit for solar to the entire project. That is allowed as long as the solar farm is the sole source for charging the battery.

But even without tax subsidies, the cost of solar farms and battery storage has fallen significantly, and opponents of the Entergy project argue that it is not cost-efficient. They say ever-cheaper supplies of renewable energy from the grid will address the intermittent needs that the peaker plant is meant to address.

The Energy Information Administration’s outlook for 2050, when many cities and states aim to get all of their electricity from carbon-free sources, shows renewables replacing coal’s potential to supply power but remaining second to natural-gas plants, which are expected to continue growing in number.

“What could change that? The continued decline in the cost of renewables,” said Mr. Corcoran of the Sierra Club. “The E.I.A. numbers have historically underestimated the growth of renewables.” And he said the price of gas was not likely to remain at the current low.

Michael Skelly, a senior adviser at Lazard, the financial advisory and asset management firm, also feels the outlook is in flux.

“All of a sudden there’s a debate,” said Mr. Skelly, whose firm conducts cost comparisons of power-plant sources. “You wouldn’t have had this debate five years ago. Do we do storage? Do we build natural-gas plants at all?”

In New Orleans, many feel that debate has not been given a fair hearing.

The fight over the Entergy plant has stirred longstanding racial tensions, highlighted in the devastation of African-American communities from Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In gatherings at homes and local churches, residents describe feelings of victimization again, this time over a power plant they do not want in their neighborhood.

“There wasn’t any input from the community at all,” said Ed Blouin, head of a local neighborhood association.

African-Americans and Vietnamese-Americans who make their homes near the site of Entergy’s project have been urging city officials to stop the project and consider alternatives.

And many point to a pattern of imposing such projects on minority areas. While the nonwhite population of the state is about 41 percent, the census tracts around the Michoud plant are 83 percent nonwhite. And more than half of the power plants in Louisiana are in census tracts where a majority of residents are nonwhite.



Source

Continue Reading
Partners
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tech

A Dance That Stops 2 of Neptune’s Moons From Colliding

Published

on

By


Neptune is the loneliest planet in the solar system. The ice giant, orbiting the sun at a distance of 2.8 billion miles, is the only planet that cannot be seen by the naked eye. Along with Uranus, we have only paid it a single visit, back when Voyager 2 zipped by in the late-1980s.

Even harder to see are the planet’s handful of moons. The fourteenth was only officially detected in February, and little is known about most of the others. But by using a combination of Hubble observations, Earth-based telescopes and data collected by Voyager 2, scientists have unearthed a curious quirk of its two innermost moons Naiad and Thalassa. These tiny worlds are engaged in a dance routine that has never been seen in the cosmos.

“These two things are definitely doing something weird,” said Marina Brozović, an expert in solar system dynamics at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the lead author of a study published in the journal Icarus last week.

Thalassa’s orbit around Neptune takes about seven and a half hours to complete; Naiad, hewing closer to the planet, takes seven. The two travel no fewer than 1,150 miles of one another. Crucially, Naiad’s orbit is tilted with respect to its partner. It zips up and down, passing by Thalassa twice from above then twice from below, a cycle that repeats whenever Naiad has lapped Thalassa four times.

This may appear chaotic at first. But Naiad’s perfectly timed undulations provide orbital stability, said Dr. Brozović. Every time these 60-mile-long, pill-shaped, icy moons line up, they are as far apart as they can get. Another, perhaps less meandering configuration could see the two diminutive moons move too close to each other and find their gravity fields entangled. This could irreversibly disturb their orbits, leading to a fatal collision or a dramatic expulsion from Neptune’s orbit.

Naiad and Thalassa’s strange salsa — a type of repeating orbital pattern known as an orbital resonance — was likely set up in the distant astronomical past.

Long ago, Neptune captured its largest moon, Triton. The large icy object was most likely stolen from the Kuiper belt beyond Neptune’s orbit, home to Pluto, Eris and many other distant worlds. Whatever moons already orbited Neptune at that time were severely perturbed by this gate-crasher. Some were annihilated through collisions or from being torn apart in Neptune’s gravitational well. This produced Neptune’s rings and its innermost moons, including Naiad and Thalassa, which serendipitously fell into their odd yet steady orbits.

This unexpected finding is a reminder that we still know so little about Neptune and its moons, said Paul Schenk, a planetary geologist at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston who wasn’t involved with the study. Only if we decide to pay it a second visit — an idea recently proposed to NASA — will its bounty of secrets be revealed, he said.

Naiad and Thalassa’s periodic, repetitive cha-cha is not the only noteworthy orbital resonance in the solar system.



Source

Continue Reading

Tech

Global Electrical Testing Services Market Split by Product Types, with Sales, Revenue, Price, Market Share Analysis during the Forecast Year 2025

Published

on

By


The global Electrical Testing Services market was valued at xx million US$ in 2018 and will reach xx million US$ by the end of 2025, growing at a CAGR of xx% during 2019-2025.

This report focuses on Electrical Testing Services volume and value at global level, regional level and company level. From a global perspective, this report represents overall Electrical Testing Services market size by analyzing historical data and future prospect.

Regionally, this report categorizes the production, apparent consumption, export and import of Electrical Testing Services in North America, Europe, China, Japan, Southeast Asia and India.

For each manufacturer covered, this report analyzes their Electrical Testing Services manufacturing sites, capacity, production, ex-factory price, revenue and market share in global market.

Access the PDF sample of the report @ https://www.orbisresearch.com/contacts/request-sample/3693239

The following manufacturers are covered:

Inel

Technomark

Voltech

Inser Hitech

Powertest

Rulka

Ultra Electric

JBS

Segment by Regions

North America

Europe

China

Japan

Southeast Asia

India

Segment by Type

Transformer Testing

Circuit Breaker Testing

Protection Testing

Battery Testing

Segment by Application

Power Generation Stations

Transmission & Distribution Stations

Steel Plants

Major Refineries

Railways

Browse the full report @ https://www.orbisresearch.com/reports/index/global-electrical-testing-services-market-professional-survey-report-2019

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Chapter One: Industry Overview of Electrical Testing Services

1.1 Definition of Electrical Testing Services

1.2 Electrical Testing Services Segment by Type

1.2.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Production Growth Rate Comparison by Types (2014-2025)

1.2.2 Transformer Testing

1.2.3 Circuit Breaker Testing

1.2.4 Protection Testing

1.2.5 Battery Testing

1.3 Electrical Testing Services Segment by Applications

1.3.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Consumption Comparison by Applications (2014-2025)

1.3.2 Power Generation Stations

1.3.3 Transmission & Distribution Stations

1.3.4 Steel Plants

1.3.5 Major Refineries

1.3.6 Railways

1.4 Global Electrical Testing Services Overall Market

1.4.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Revenue (2014-2025)

1.4.2 Global Electrical Testing Services Production (2014-2025)

1.4.3 North America Electrical Testing Services Status and Prospect (2014-2025)

1.4.4 Europe Electrical Testing Services Status and Prospect (2014-2025)

1.4.5 China Electrical Testing Services Status and Prospect (2014-2025)

1.4.6 Japan Electrical Testing Services Status and Prospect (2014-2025)

1.4.7 Southeast Asia Electrical Testing Services Status and Prospect (2014-2025)

1.4.8 India Electrical Testing Services Status and Prospect (2014-2025)

Chapter Two: Manufacturing Cost Structure Analysis

2.1 Raw Material and Suppliers

2.2 Manufacturing Cost Structure Analysis of Electrical Testing Services

2.3 Manufacturing Process Analysis of Electrical Testing Services

2.4 Industry Chain Structure of Electrical Testing Services

Chapter Three: Development and Manufacturing Plants Analysis of Electrical Testing Services

3.1 Capacity and Commercial Production Date

3.2 Global Electrical Testing Services Manufacturing Plants Distribution

3.3 Major Manufacturers Technology Source and Market Position of Electrical Testing Services

3.4 Recent Development and Expansion Plans

Chapter Four: Key Figures of Major Manufacturers

4.1 Electrical Testing Services Production and Capacity Analysis

4.2 Electrical Testing Services Revenue Analysis

4.3 Electrical Testing Services Price Analysis

4.4 Market Concentration Degree

Chapter Five: Electrical Testing Services Regional Market Analysis

5.1 Electrical Testing Services Production by Regions

5.1.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Production by Regions

5.1.2 Global Electrical Testing Services Revenue by Regions

5.2 Electrical Testing Services Consumption by Regions

5.3 North America Electrical Testing Services Market Analysis

5.3.1 North America Electrical Testing Services Production

5.3.2 North America Electrical Testing Services Revenue

5.3.3 Key Manufacturers in North America

5.3.4 North America Electrical Testing Services Import and Export

5.4 Europe Electrical Testing Services Market Analysis

5.4.1 Europe Electrical Testing Services Production

5.4.2 Europe Electrical Testing Services Revenue

5.4.3 Key Manufacturers in Europe

5.4.4 Europe Electrical Testing Services Import and Export

5.5 China Electrical Testing Services Market Analysis

5.5.1 China Electrical Testing Services Production

5.5.2 China Electrical Testing Services Revenue

5.5.3 Key Manufacturers in China

5.5.4 China Electrical Testing Services Import and Export

5.6 Japan Electrical Testing Services Market Analysis

5.6.1 Japan Electrical Testing Services Production

5.6.2 Japan Electrical Testing Services Revenue

5.6.3 Key Manufacturers in Japan

5.6.4 Japan Electrical Testing Services Import and Export

5.7 Southeast Asia Electrical Testing Services Market Analysis

5.7.1 Southeast Asia Electrical Testing Services Production

5.7.2 Southeast Asia Electrical Testing Services Revenue

5.7.3 Key Manufacturers in Southeast Asia

5.7.4 Southeast Asia Electrical Testing Services Import and Export

5.8 India Electrical Testing Services Market Analysis

5.8.1 India Electrical Testing Services Production

5.8.2 India Electrical Testing Services Revenue

5.8.3 Key Manufacturers in India

5.8.4 India Electrical Testing Services Import and Export

Chapter Six: Electrical Testing Services Segment Market Analysis (by Type)

6.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Production by Type

6.2 Global Electrical Testing Services Revenue by Type

6.3 Electrical Testing Services Price by Type

Chapter Seven: Electrical Testing Services Segment Market Analysis (by Application)

7.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Consumption by Application

7.2 Global Electrical Testing Services Consumption Market Share by Application (2014-2019)

Chapter Eight: Electrical Testing Services Major Manufacturers Analysis

8.1 Inel

8.1.1 Inel Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.1.2 Inel Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.1.3 Inel Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.1.4 Main Business and Markets Served

8.2 Technomark

8.2.1 Technomark Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.2.2 Technomark Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.2.3 Technomark Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.2.4 Main Business and Markets Served

8.3 Voltech

8.3.1 Voltech Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.3.2 Voltech Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.3.3 Voltech Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.3.4 Main Business and Markets Served

8.4 Inser Hitech

8.4.1 Inser Hitech Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.4.2 Inser Hitech Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.4.3 Inser Hitech Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.4.4 Main Business and Markets Served

8.5 Powertest

8.5.1 Powertest Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.5.2 Powertest Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.5.3 Powertest Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.5.4 Main Business and Markets Served

8.6 Rulka

8.6.1 Rulka Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.6.2 Rulka Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.6.3 Rulka Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.6.4 Main Business and Markets Served

8.7 Ultra Electric

8.7.1 Ultra Electric Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.7.2 Ultra Electric Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.7.3 Ultra Electric Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.7.4 Main Business and Markets Served

8.8 JBS

8.8.1 JBS Electrical Testing Services Production Sites and Area Served

8.8.2 JBS Product Introduction, Application and Specification

8.8.3 JBS Electrical Testing Services Production, Revenue, Ex-factory Price and Gross Margin (2014-2019)

8.8.4 Main Business and Markets Served

Chapter Nine: Development Trend of Analysis of Electrical Testing Services Market

9.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Market Trend Analysis

9.1.1 Global Electrical Testing Services Market Size (Volume and Value) Forecast 2019-2025

9.2 Electrical Testing Services Regional Market Trend

9.2.1 North America Electrical Testing Services Forecast 2019-2025

9.2.2 Europe Electrical Testing Services Forecast 2019-2025

9.2.3 China Electrical Testing Services Forecast 2019-2025

9.2.4 Japan Electrical Testing Services Forecast 2019-2025

9.2.5 Southeast Asia Electrical Testing Services Forecast 2019-2025

9.2.6 India Electrical Testing Services Forecast 2019-2025

9.3 Electrical Testing Services Market Trend (Product Type)

9.4 Electrical Testing Services Market Trend (Application)

10.1 Marketing Channel

10.1.1 Direct Marketing

10.1.2 Indirect Marketing

10.3 Electrical Testing Services Customers

Chapter Eleven: Market Dynamics

11.1 Market Trends

11.2 Opportunities

11.3 Market Drivers

11.4 Challenges

11.5 Influence Factors

Chapter Twelve: Conclusion

Chapter Thirteen: Appendix

13.1 Methodology/Research Approach

13.1.1 Research Programs/Design

13.1.2 Market Size Estimation

13.1.3 Market Breakdown and Data Triangulation

13.2 Data Source

13.2.1 Secondary Sources

13.2.2 Primary Sources

13.3 Author List

13.4 Disclaimer

Direct purchase the report @ https://www.orbisresearch.com/contact/purchase-single-user/3693239

About Us:

Orbis Research (orbisresearch.com) is a single point aid for all your market research requirements. We have vast database of reports from the leading publishers and authors across the globe. We specialize in delivering customized reports as per the requirements of our clients. We have complete information about our publishers and hence are sure about the accuracy of the industries and verticals of their specialization. This helps our clients to map their needs and we produce the perfect required market research study for our clients.

Contact Us:

Hector Costello
Senior Manager – Client Engagements
4144N Central Expressway,
Suite 600, Dallas,
Texas – 75204, U.S.A.
Phone No.: +1 (972)-362-8199; +91 895 659 5155



Source

Continue Reading

Tech

WeWork lays off 2,400 employees

Published

on

By


A pedestrian walks by a WeWork office on October 07, 2019 in San Francisco, California. Days after withdrawing its registration for an initial public offering, WeWork also warned employees that the company could be set to lay off nearly 2,000 people, about 16 percent of its workforce.

Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

WeWork is laying off 2,400 employees as it works to cut costs and right-size the business, the company confirmed to CNBC.

In a statement, a WeWork spokesperson told CNBC that the cuts were being made as part of the company’s efforts to “create a more efficient organization” and refocus on the core office-sharing business. The job cuts represent 19% of WeWork’s total workforce, which amounted to 12,500 employees as of June 30, according to an SEC filing.

“The process began weeks ago in regions around the world and continued this week in the U.S.,” the spokesperson said. “This workforce reduction affects approximately 2,400 employees globally, who will receive severance, continued benefits, and other forms of assistance to aid in their career transition. These are incredibly talented professionals and we are grateful for the important roles they have played in building WeWork over the last decade.”

Leading up to the announcement, reports of forthcoming job cuts had been circulating for weeks. The New York Times reported on Sunday that WeWork could cut at least 4,000 jobs across its core office-sharing business and some side ventures. In October, Marcelo Claure, WeWork’s new executive chairman, warned that layoffs would be on the way but didn’t say how many would be announced.

Claure said in a memo to employees earlier this week that the company will hold an all-hands meeting at 10 a.m. Eastern Friday to address the changes coming to the company.

The layoffs come after several tumultuous months for WeWork. In September, the beleaguered start-up pulled its IPO filing after investors balked at its mounting losses and unusual corporate governance structure. The scrutiny forced WeWork founder Adam Neumann to step down from his role as CEO, with Sebastian Gunningham and Artie Minson stepping in as co-CEOs.

WeWork was poised to run out of money in a matter of weeks, but secured an eleventh-hour bailout deal from SoftBank, its biggest investor. With a new owner in place, WeWork is expected to make sweeping changes to its business, including divesting non-core businesses and focusing on enterprise customers, instead of small and mid-sized clients. However, the company continues to bleed cash, reporting $1.25 billion in losses in the third quarter, up more than 150% from the same period last year.



Source

Continue Reading

Trending

We use cookies to best represent our site. By continuing to use this site, you agree to the use of cookies.
Yes