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.
That Shell and BP own sites along the road system occurs not because they want to protect the planet. They own them to make money and to shift the stuff they get out of the ground. Really in the same way that other businesses shift their noodles/pizza/newspapers at similar places along the road.
That the oil industry is a core part of the modern world cannot be denied. That they have known they are in the wrong for the last 35ish years cannot also not be denied ( see Thatcher UN lecture).
Yes they want some greenwash, but don't believe a scorpion will not sting you if you put your hand near it. BP investment in greenwash is 5% of their total investment planned for 2020.
Trust is earned, when will they start?
Bilbob, I would not bite the hand that feeds ITM, e.g. SHELL. Big oil companies have ideal forecourts for ITM purchased kit. BP were ahead of the curve with their hydrogen fuel station at Hornchurch. What was responsible for failure of that H2 parallel world that Seaangler so eloquently described? Deep pockets are required now to get the economies of scale right this time. ITM's new factory demonstrates their high expectations.
Well said Bilbs , on the mark as always. Imagine a parallel world where H2 was the original go to power source , produced indirectly from the wind and the sun. Someone then realises that if you dig deep enough far out in the oceans , you can find some black fluid that burns. Then someone builds an incredibly complex engine to burn it in. How would the costing comparisons sit ? Finally , now realise that the new stuff chokes......
https://www.woven-city.global/?fbclid=IwAR0HaByRDR9YUCgPDVw_LHnQXwdOLiYpRphntzMa6RydrBMIc6Dfv-QqbJ0
Worth a look. Off another share site I follow.
I spent a few years in hydrogen, it is not very leaky, yes it is a small fast molecule but for day to day work within Newtonian science environment (our day to day world) it doesn't leak.
Best source will be electrolysis, very low cost, great efficiency if coupled to solar or wind. Certainly way better than the energy sources being phased out in the UK, coal, oil etc.
Oil companies are setting up Trolls to argue against science because this is going to disrupt their business. Make a decision, save the oil companies or save our species' position on the planet. I vote for humanity, not BP.
They recommend undertaking a PESTEL analysis to get a full and balanced view when doing marketing appraisals and action plans and share investing is certainly a good place to apply the theory. So in a simplified nutshell there appears to be political, economic, social and legal issues currently still strongly mitigating against the hydrogen economy with technological and environmental issues in favour.
I suspect it is simpler than that. Moving to hydrogen is really very capital intensive and requires a massive mind change for everyone, and it destroys most of the auto/oil industry. It was seen as just too big a step. Certainly, that seems to have been where both Greenpeace and the ImechE were coming from. Even now the oil/ auto industry are fighting back because disruption is not what you want happening to your industry and your assets. I expect some massive write-downs after Davis as old industries are dumped.
From listening to this programme, and the solutions advocated by environmental activists generally, it's clear that the current world governmental leaders/advisers on environmental issues long ago dismissed hydrogen and are resisting any revision of their opinions. Government leads are wedded to the belief that the only solution is for people to radically change their lifestyle, (e.g solutions put forward are to ban cars, eat less/no meat, use solar panels and turn down the heat etc) Hydrogen goes against that world view BECAUSE it means people don't have to so radically change their habits. The current leads don't want that! They want to promote lifestyle change so basically its political. Their political world view was probably formed in the 90s when they were at University and they are still stuck there. Unless the current global strategic directors' mindsets are forced to change, either through the evidence of continued independent R&D, market developments or environmental emergencies, the current dominant philosophy (and the subsequent action plans) do not favour hydrogen as a global solution.
I've now listened to it as well. I have to agree c&c, it wasn't particularly enthusiastic but I sort of anticipated that with their question mark in the show's title. I hope, in time, the trepidation that the presenter/reporter exhibits will subside as the technology becomes normalised. The ongoing successes in the myriad current trials and demonstration projects is certainly confirming it as the fuel of the future - the very near future...in fact I'm betting we'll see it transition as the fuel of this new decade.
I've listened to it. Basically it was not very positive about Hydyrogen I have to say!
Does anyone need reminding that BBC radio had a programme today on hydrogen.
Hydrogen: The answer to Climate Change? on BBC Word Service "Global Business". The programme was scheduled for 8.30am GMT and should be available to play again here...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csy82q
I haven't listened to it yet so can't comment on content.