Stefan Bernstein explains how the EU/Greenland critical raw materials partnership benefits GreenRoc. Watch the full 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.
Of course they want it to go ahead. What they want and what they may nessesarily get, could differ...
You say that the likes of BA have invested a few million for the PR
If the project does not go ahead this is not going to be good PR is it.
So that doesn't make sense.
There is a lot of momentum on climate change right now.
Wrong in what context? We seem to have drifted a long way from your original, and, dare I suggest somewhat inaccurate, post. I can only wonder why someone who clearly believes that VLS is a busted flush wastes so much time posting on the subject.
wrong. In the waste to energy space, there are countless projects that go for PP without a plan for subsequent financing. They do it to sell-on the project - but normally these projects are proven technologies costing in the order of 150-200m. We are talking new tech in our case, costing 500m+. Aint gonna happen.
The ability to get a planning application does not affect the financial or technical viability of the company or project. The investors (the real ones, not the PR hunters, pumping in a few million), know this. No investment house will risk hundreds of millions of pounds worth of pension money on a company with no track record and for a project that has not been done before, even at a small scale (VLS have not completed a MSWel process at small scale).
You also don't appreciate the funding needed to actually get to the point of financing. We are probably talking 10-20m of more work to get to the point of FID, then you'll need 150m of captial Only then can you get financier air time, and there's no guarantee you'll get that loan.
Its a great concept - but its being done too big, too fast and by a company that should be sticking with technology development, not project development.
You seem to have missed my point. You are right Councils do not consider financial viability with regard to a planning application. Investors, however, do. This project cannot proceed without investors. It therefore follows with an elegant simplicity that those investors that have stuck with the project (ie all the IIs), plus Shell & BA, clearly believe that the necessary funding is available. You obviously do not. Should the application fail, IMHO VLS would only appeal if they have the funding in place. If the application is approved there would doubtless be an announcement by VLS with regard to their future plans (this assumes that any funding is might have been conditional upon planning approval). Either way, there should be a clear indication as to the viability of the project.
I have plenty of experience in the waste to energy sector, that relates directly to this. Its hard enough trying to introduce new technology to an existing market, but trying to do the same with a new market simultaneously (fuels) will be nigh on impossible unless your pockets are bottomless, or you have blue chips on you BOD. VLS leadership changes too much, which says alot. If the track record is anything to go by, I suspect more departures of key staff in the near future.
Granting of Planning permission has nothing to do with financial viability of the applicants business.
The VLS application is a good one (Ive seen some terrible ones), but falls a little short on required detail to get a clear affirmative and this can be seen from the EA responses.
I think you are trying to talk down the project without any strong information to support your argument. If the IIs believe that VLS is not capable of raising the necessary finance for both its major projects they would have pulled out long ago. In my experience, planning applications are finite in that on the day (29 N0v) the Council will say yes or no. The yes may well be conditional (I'd be surprised if it wasn't) but a no would leave the applicant with the only option of going to appeal. Either way it will provide a clear indication of the resolve and funding that VLS has available.
Thug, you're being a touch delusional. VLS will be out of funds in about 3 months and I doubt a raise will happen any time soon. IMHO, VLS will not get this project funded - its first of type, waaay too expensive there's no capital available (at least 150million pounds needed). Shell are only in this for a punt, whilst BA are getting great PR. If VLS goes belly up, either party can wash their hands of us quite easily and switch to something with better legs. Investors will 'get out' of the project by way of not investing any more funds. F4C wont be forthcoming, if atall, with all that's going on in UKGov.
Planning permission wont happen next week - quite a few outstanding issues on the application, particularity around the water cleaning. I think end of year at best.
Oh really!! Shell, a Dutch Company, supporting the same agenda in its home country as it is supporting in the UK hardly justifies the "jump ship" headline you put on it. There have been no moves by the major investors to get out of the Immingham project, so clearly they must believe that it is doable once the planning permission is (hopefully) obtained next week. It is therefore reasonable to assume that they believe that the necessary finance is available. Could you be erroneous in your views, I wonder?
Looks like Shell is expanding their scope and partnering with more projects. As usual, no real commitments - just technical and commercial support...
https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/3083791/shell-supports-europes-first-sustainable-aviation-fuel-plant