Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Ceres missed out on a new deal this financial year, hence their share price drop
I think some CCS can work. So the Icelandic process of injection into a heated stone structure works
Injecting back into a salt dome structure is just a trick to get more oil out.
Do we need CCS? Yes. But I like the tree solution best
No, but it is a reasonable question to ask the FD. I'd email him
Cureboy has it correct as far as I'm concerned. Where else can you buy 62p for 50p?
You have to decide how well connected the share price is to the company. For most companies, those with very active sales books it is possible to see a strong connection. Big new orders lead to rise in share prices, a history of growing profits and sales lead to ever rising share prices. Microsoft is a good example of this.
ITM is not one of these. So many people really don't want to believe in Climate Change. So many hope that "daddy" will solve it for them. (for daddy also read god, God, the government, someone else). There is no daddy, we all have to do it.
We do it by moving off carbon based fuels. One of the key tools is green hydrogen. When people stop using blue hydrogen they will have ot use green hydrogen. Your decision is are there better investments out there. The honest answer is yes. ITM has made me lots of money but even I have only 1% of my wealth invested here, strangely I spend 50% of my time monitoring it.
Why? Because I see this company as the canary in the mine for climate change. If it fails, civilisation is doomed.
Dennis 3 days ago, shafting the idea of "low carbon hydrogen"
Fossil-based (natural gas) grey hydrogen production generates 10 tons of CO2 per 1 ton of hydrogen… not a great ratio, is it?
The idea of blue hydrogen is that instead of emitting this massive amount of CO2 into the atmosphere, the CO2 is captured, transported (over oftentimes long distances) and sequestrated, which means putting and storing it under the surface of the earth.
Whilst I agree that if faced with only the two options to either emit the CO2 into the atmosphere, or to sequestrate the CO2, then the latter is certainly the preferable option. Now, this of course applies to upgrading existing grey hydrogen production plants.
But does anybody really feel that this is the better or even a remotely comparable route to clean green hydrogen - and not generating CO2 in the first place? Or really even cheaper in the long run?
More and more oil and gas lobbyists are trying to convince governments to back blue hydrogen also for new installations, which would include building new grey hydrogen plants plus CCS. Also, they are lobbying governments to no longer speak of blue and green hydrogen, but only of “low carbon hydrogen”, so that the two become indistinguishable.
This is where my sympathy ends.
Blue hydrogen is a bridging technology to accelerate the decarbonisation of existing assets and has a role to play to kickstart the hydrogen economy. Not more, not less. Everything else is morally questionable.
Https://www.energydashboard.co.uk/live
is a place to watch
Picking up toneman's point, one of the main energy storage places that may become important to us is in the car and house. As more and more houses get energy storage they will be able to export and import.
This year my house has generated far more energy than it and my car has consumed and is a net contributor to my income. So still nights have not really been a problem
Well when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining in the UK then that power will not be generated in the UK. But tidal power will still be generated in the UK and other green energy will be generated in the UK like biomass, thermal, water storage and then any green energy that has been stored in chemical batteries will still be being released. Just like Fossil Fuels you can store solar energy just not in oil tanks.
Meanwhile the same weather cycle that might bring the UK a still air movement will bring Portugal a storm, hence the need to have Europe wide and larger grids.
I would say that the UK is not an island, but of course it is more like 1000 islands so different places will be exporting and other importing energy at the same time.
The tides will still be flowing. The larger European and North African power grid will still be functioning and energy will be released from multiple versions of different types of batteries.
Telegraph; not the best source of information or facts, more of a blue garden fence with holiday adverts. But whatever floats your boat.
12 months ago it was Overvalued at £600m by people who thought it was a well run company with a coming order book.
Now it is Undervalued by people see an opportunity to short it as it has no stream of orders.
The test is more what you think it is worth. If less than 53 p then sell it, if more that 53 p then buy it.
Me, I think it is worth more than 40p, which is what the majority of my shares cost me. Technically it is now in reasonable shape.
From a sales point of view COP28 will stitch up the human civilization and we will all have different problems compared with the share price if a business that we need to running full out.
US are targeting sub $2/kg but that is for green h2, not liquid green h2
One kg of h2 liberates roughly 1 gallon of petrol's energy
Https://heshydrogen.com/hydrogen-fuel-cost-vs-gasoline/ is an interesting link
A 40% efficient piston ff engine would be only in a lab or a top end diesel engine. That is just the engine before it hits the power train
The key issue is ffuels are so cheap because have been subsidised for so long that people don't ever see it as subsidy, from the wars that are fought over it, to the pollution ffs get a free pass. But when a company has to clean up after itself.... strangely they just went bust or sold off to an owner without any capital.
as long as ff companies get all this free money then h2 will never make it in this world.
Economist this week has a fascinating special on Carbon sequestration. Worth a read
Filter, is a powerful weapon to remove noise
If efficiency was an issue no one would drive diesel or petrol cars. Depending on how you measure they barely hit 30%, or 17%
On the other hand, it is always wise to understand your enemy and read the detail not necessarily just their conclusion. (which may well be biased)
Https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/24/the-odyssey-of-the-hydrogen-fleet-a-tragicomedy-in-six-acts/. Take a breath and read through to the end. Motive is gone, good riddance.
The Economist is pretty critical of the structural issues that a government having only a Treasury rather than also an Economics Ministry means that we get this stop/go control which makes running businesses in the UK so tough