佰家富app官方网站_佰家富app计划
佰家富app登录2023-01-31 16:05

佰家富app官方网站

困在成本里的农夫山泉******

  “大自然的搬运工”打响了2023年桶装水涨价的第一枪。2月1日,农夫山泉宣布提高杭州市桶装水售价。尽管农夫山泉方面表示暂未接到其他城市产品调价的通知,但在客服给出其他地区用户可以先购买兑换卡“以防万一”的建议下,农夫山泉难道要全面涨价的消息也就传了出来。

  全国性涨价猜测

  2月1日,一张农夫山泉《杭州区域19升水调价通知》(以下简称《通知》)在业界流传,根据《通知》内容,农夫山泉要提高杭州市部分规格桶装水售价。北京商报记者拨打农夫山泉官网电话得知,自2023年2月1日起,杭州市农夫山泉19L规格桶装水零售价由此前的20元/桶提高至22元/桶。

  对于本次提价原因,农夫山泉表示主要是物价、原材料、人工及运费等成本不断上涨导致。这个理由似曾相识,在2021年12月28日,农夫山泉发布价格调整公告,就上海地区19L的天然水零售价格进行调整,从26元/桶调整到28元/桶,原因也是“原材料、人力、运输等运营成本的影响”。

  上海、杭州桶装水相继提价,这让其他地区的消费者猜测:农夫山泉这波涨价潮会全国性蔓延吗?

  根据农夫山泉方面的说法,此次仅杭州市产品零售价格有调整,后续是否会降价以届时产品显示售价为准。至于此次涨价是否会扩散至其他城市,农夫山泉方面没有给出明确回应,仅表示暂未接到通知。“目前,北京地区农夫山泉桶装水售价是28元/桶,以防万一,用户可以先购买兑换卡,现在比较优惠。”对方建议道。

  在战略定位专家、九德定位咨询公司创始人徐雄俊看来,农夫山泉先在一二线城市涨价试水,之后有可能会推广到全国。

  广科院旗下广科咨询首席策略师沈萌则认为,产品涨价主要与运营成本的变动有关,一线城市的运营成本上涨幅度高于其他城市,所以对于桶装水这样一个完全竞争的市场,除非出现行业性普遍涨价,否则并不会短期内集中出现全国性普涨。

  成本难控毛利下滑

  桶装水所在的包装饮用水业务占据农夫山泉五成以上营收。2021年,农夫山泉包装饮用水产品收入为170.58亿元。不过,从近两年财报数据来看,水生意似乎也不好做了。

  2022年上半年,农夫山泉包装饮用水业务的收益仅增长了4.8%,比2021年同期25.6%的增长差了一大截。而包装饮用水所占营收比例也从2021年的58.8%降为2022年的56.7%。

  这样的数据表现背后的原因一部分来自成本压力。自2021年,农夫山泉就频频在财报中提及成本上涨问题。2022年中报显示,农夫山泉最主要的原材料PET为原油下游产品,而原油价格上升和波动的不确定性,给农夫山泉成本控制带来了压力。同时提到,集团毛利率由去年同期的60.9%下降1.6%至59.3%,主要是由于国际原油价格变动导致PET采购成本提高。

  在2022年3月的一场分析师业绩会上,农夫山泉执行董事周震华就直言,成本压力已经“超过企业单方面可以去消化的水平”。

  面对成本压力,水企龙头农夫山泉开年率先提价,行业内其他企业会加入这场涨价潮吗?而成本高企之下,涨价又是“农夫山泉们”的解药吗?

  在徐雄俊看来,原材料价格上涨是农夫山泉成本拉高的最核心原因。近几年随着消费升级趋势和消费意识的转变,一些消费者愿意花更高的价格买更好的饮用水,一定程度上企业涨价算是顺势而为。当然,对于当下面对的成本压力,产品提价是企业缓解压力比较好的办法。

  中国食品产业分析师朱丹蓬认为,中国饮用水竞争已经进入了非常“内卷”的周期。从水种来说,农夫山泉不具备优势;从品牌效应到规模效应,农夫山泉有优势但不是碾压式的优势。其他的水企应该也不会跟进涨价。

  北京商报记者 郭秀娟 张函

中新网评:处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事******

  中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称,将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对,企图将核污水“一倒了之”,把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。

资料图:日本福岛第一核电站。

  2011年,福岛核电站事故发生后,大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋,对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害,数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日,作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。

  日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由,在2021年4月13日,正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多,日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。

  日本政府辩称,这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全,甚至“可以喝”,这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。

  事实上,经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质,核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收,长期来看,将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁,最终危害人类健康。

  因此,核污水排海计划推出后,遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示,福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中,约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场,反对该计划。

  日本政府认为,核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案,但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海,核污水会随着洋流流动,其影响势必会跨越国界,危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。

  《韩国经济新闻》发文称,相关研究认为,福岛核污水如果排放入海,约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域,该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。

  德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告,若日本将所有核污水排入海中,不到半年,整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁,包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。

  日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国,有义务保护海洋环境。然而,在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上,日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。

  国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估,但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论,并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下,日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设,这是极不负责任的行为。

  太平洋不是日本的下水道,日本必须正视各方合理关切,在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后,制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远,若只顾眼前,执意将核污水排放入海,不仅其自身,周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单,其后果必将会危害数代人。

  Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business

  By John Lee

  (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year.

  Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business.

  The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

  On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year.

  The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public.

  In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run.

  Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public.

  The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution.

  The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community.

  The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses.

  According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan.

  As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment.

  However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact.

  Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad.

  The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies.

  If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.

 

中国网客户端

国家重点新闻网站,9语种权威发布

佰家富app地图