Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Steptoes......." ethical qualms"...LMFAO
I was referring yo your comments directed at me "Cult worship implications" but more importantly this paragraph
"If and when they "ascertain oil flow" and report back, for example, that the formation water was a misunderstanding and that the well can flow at 500 or 1,000 barrels of 'dry' oil per day, even for a few hours, then everything changes - very possibly as soon as April this year. They now have an asset of some proven value.
Now April was never going to be on the cards to be producing. You insinuate fantasy figures and its bang on guaranteed DRY OIL apparently and still forget that they only get 25% of this bounty! That's without mentioning they will be restricted on daily production bty the OGA and have stated the well would be shut in timescales of hours to months!
So we now know that there will be a long delay after stage one as the new infrastructure will then go to design stage
5. CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND DESIGN
Contingent upon the success of Stage 1 of the development (pumping out previously used drilling fluids to ascertain
any oil flow (up to 4 weeks)), a detailed civil and structural design will be prepared, informed by this Design Philosophy
Statement, the geotechnical evaluation, chemical analysis and interpretive reporting.
In formulating a design, the following key criteria considered:
? Environmental condition;
? Geotechnical condition;
? Drainage requirements, including falls to encourage surface run-off;
? Vehicle movements;
? Lifting/loading requirements;
? Health and safety; and
? Design life.
This gives them all the can-kicking time they like wouldn't you agree?
Your subtle attempts at discrediting posters by name-calling really is the refuge of the lowest form of ramper.
So far this weekend you have accused me of ....Being the head of orchestrated group of non-holders, Cult worship and this morning being a conspiracy theorist.........thats without your lazy use of troll on numerous posts regarding other posters.
I think the latest revelation of more delay justifies my orchestrated cultish conspiracy theory......dont you??
I'd estimate its about 3-4 weeks work
A week to get the old stuff out , a week to relay everything and a week to do all the nuts and bolts - then a week to set up the test kit properly
Steptoes
You really should have read the document that has just been put onto WSCC web site before you posted that twaddle.
I suggest you read through thoroughly. The report from Zetland group which indicates the scope of works to take pace
if after stage one is successful. The scope they are talking about is huge in scale!
? Removal of the existing 300mm granular platform surface material, existing polypropylene geo-grid and
existing geotextile;
? If required, screen existing granular material, removing large cobles in excess of 50mm;
? A ‘V-Type’ perimeter containment ditch and HDPE impermeable membrane anchor berm surrounding the
active area of the wellsite;
? A fully welded 2mm thick HDPE impermeable membrane laid across the active area of the wellsite and
perimeter containment ditch;
? Protective geotextiles laid below and above the HDPE impermeable membrane;
? Batten fixing the HDPE impermeable membrane to existing concrete pad, which surrounds the Balcombe-
2z drilling cellar;
? Twin-wall perforated pipe and rodding/jetting points laid within the perimeter containment ditch, above
the HDPE impermeable membrane and protective geotextiles, back filled to finished platform level using
40mm single size granular material;
? A connection from the twin-wall perforated pipe system to the existing interceptor and installation of
isolation valves (up and down stream of interceptor) and a sampling point downstream of the interceptor;
? A layer of extruded polypropylene geo-grid across the active area of the wellsite, above the HDPE
impermeable membrane and protective geotextiles, for additional structural support; and
? A 300mm thick layer of compacted granular material above the protective geotextile and geo-grid, providing
the finished wellsite platform with nominal fall toward the perimeter containment ditch.
Containment Area Area/Length Material Depth/Volume
Overall Containment Area to Anchor Trench 4,141m2 Various Depths and Materials
Wellsite Platform (Excluding Perimeter
Containment Ditch, Concrete Pad and Concrete
Access Area)
3,199m2
300mm Granular Material (50mm
to Dust)
Concrete Pad 200m2 250mm Concrete
Concrete Access Area 51m2 250mm Concrete
Perimeter Containment Ditch 242m (Mean Length) 1.5m3 x 242m = 363m3 Granular
Material (40mm Single Size)
Now, this is why I have such issues with this company! This is hardly moving straight on after stage one is it...........and how much is that little lot going to cost.
https://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.asp?ShareTicker=ANGS&share=Angus-Energy&thread=BF1EB8AF-8641-4D82-944C-565B2C35C506&reply=true
DYOR people
Sorry
With regards to the Bat question, I believe Angus's solution was to propose to finish work before the bats leave their
roosts. (This was during the 1st 4 week removal period). So possibly putting a few extra days onto stage 1.
Steptoes
I agree with you that I think it's likely to go threw but with caveats!
Just having read the revised version there will now be a long break (can kick) after the 1st stage of water removal. This would be to install the new bund as required by the EA. Now it doesn't give a time scale for this work but reading through it seems to be a bit more than a few days and a few quids worth!! hence Gbk can kick comment I believe they will be applying for permission retrospectively for this part of the works .
With regards to the Bat question i believe Angus's solution was to propose to finish work before the bats leave their
roosts. (This was during the 1st 4 week removal period0. So possibly
https://westsussex.planning-register.co.uk/Document/Download?module=PLA&recordNumber=1635&planId=43947&imageId=614&isPlan=False&fileName=Hydrological%20Risk%20Assessment%20and%20covering%20letter.pdf
Link to relavant article
https://drillordrop.com/2020/01/17/breaking-egdon-wins-appeal-on-wressle-oil-production/
Mirasol
OK understood. Some I think took it as an excuse for muddying waters thinking it was to be added to the investor question list.
Just looked as if it had been added to the list
Ocelot
No arguments regarding CCouncills from me! The whole process is excruciating. Im sure all CC will be aware as demonstrated by the Planning committee for the Balcombe hearing all being sent on O&G refresher courses before the meeting on Feb 25TH.
JA51
posted on the right board - Planning is everyone's biggest enemy onshore UK - for too long the swampies and their allies have pressured councils into dragging their feet and coming up with obtuse decisions
The very clear statements in the Egdon decision will be read by Councillors and planners across the country and will be good for onshore companies of all hues.
Angus should be the first beneficiary........ it's about time SOMETHING went right here.......
Mirasol posted this message at 15:58 yesterday:
Egdon have planning permission awarded for Wressle and the Council will have to pay some costs. That should sober up a few grandstanding Councillors across the UK
Morning All
I think Mirasol may have posted this on the wrong board?? Although it Relates to Saltfleetby as its the same county councill.
What has been posted is statements made by the planning inspectorate and relating to another company.
Probably just a coincidence the numbers on the list are close as the questions that will be submitted on Monday to the Angus questions and answer forum relate to Questions for Angus.
That's pretty resounding stuff, Mirasol, thank you for your post.
https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3221694 documents
The Inspector wrote:-
PPG advises that costs may be awarded against a party who has behaved unreasonably and thereby caused the party applying for costs to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process.
16. The Council’s professional officers and its consultants recommended that planning permission should be granted, subject to conditions. The reason for refusal was generalised and, as it subsequently transpired, unsupported by any objective analysis. The aim of the costs regime is to encourage local planning authorities to properly exercise their development management responsibilities and to rely only on reasons for refusal which stand up to scrutiny. The authority did not exercise its functions in this way.
17. This unreasonable behaviour was compounded by the subsequent delay by the authority. The Council’s Statement of Case was inadequate, and there was a further delay of two months. This delay was unreasonable and continued to contribute to the appellant’s unnecessary expense.
18. After the delay the authority finally withdrew its case and accepted that conditional planning permission should be granted. There was never any evidence to substantiate the refusal or explain that it was a reasonable response to the application. PPG advises that failure to substantiate reasons for refusal is unreasonable and that one example of behaviour that may give rise to a procedural award against a local planning authority is withdrawal of a reason for refusal (in this case the sole reason). It is unreasonable to refuse planning permission where objections are capable of being dealt with by conditions.
19. Overall, as accepted by the Council, the authority has delayed a development which should clearly be permitted, having regard to the common ground now agreed between the parties as to the development plan, national policy and other material considerations. This is entirely at odds with the advice in the PPG and constitutes unreasonable behaviour.
20. I therefore find that unreasonable behaviour resulting in unnecessary or wasted expense, as described in PPG, has been demonstrated and that a full award of costs is justified.
Costs Order
21. In exercise of the powers under section 250(5) of the Local Government Act 1972 and Schedule 6 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended, and all other enabling powers in that behalf, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that North Lincolnshire Council shall pay to Egdon Resources UK Limited, the costs of the appeal proceedings described in the heading of this decision such costs to be assessed in the Senior Courts Costs Office if not agreed.
22. The applicant is now invited to submit to North Lincolnshire Council, to whom a copy of this decision has been sent, details of those costs with a view to reaching agreement as to the amount.
Egdon have planning permission awarded for Wressle and the Council will have to pay some costs. That should sober up a few grandstanding Councillors across the UK