Member Info for elir71

Ive criticised Alba in the past for not applying for enough permits and enough time, as these things should not lie on the critical path. The reason for that if processes on the critical path are in the hands of others, then the achievement of your goals are outside of your hands.

If Alba are applying for every reasonably forseeable permit for their plans then I fully support that. Take a look at Sctogold's site, it presents the environmental reports. As you'll see , they are very comprehensive and must have taken a considerable amount of work to compile.

I dont think Alba are dragging their feet in any way. The communication record between ALBA's environmental consultant and NRW is in the public domain, though lacking in detail (possibly deliberately) as the substance of the discourse was made by telephone conversation between NRW and the consultant. I wrote to ALBA some weeks ago asking for an explanation but they declined to disclose the nature of the issues with NRW as the information was understandably deemed of a market sensitive nature. My personal take on it, is that the 4 months that NRW have had to reach a decision was coming to an end, so they decided at the last moment to request additional information and suggested that ALBA apply for an extension.

My experience with the forerunner to these agencies are that they do not act with any alacrity, unless it is to penalise someone.

"the market does not think the same" .... really ? as far as I can see there's been a handful of tiny trades and one market maker dropped their ask. That hardly constitutes the flock decision making of a market.

If market manipulation wasnt illegal it would be very easy to manipulate the price at these low liquidities and profit from spread bet positions which wont alter the underlying SP

The problem with secretive projects is that the lack of transparency limits the value that can be attributed to it.

@yanis, would you rather the basis of the valuation of ALBAs contribution to greenroc valued on pre jorc valuation rather than post jorc valuation for the sake of a few weeks' wait.?

@Salinger, well noted
I'd add that there is nothing stopping PQE from entering into a licencing agreement with QFI though.
I was also wondering if the Chevron pipeline could be used to transport the product if it was MSAR. I dont know anything about oil pipelines, so I dont know if pumping the output (syrup consistency) would be practicable, however, pumping MSAR would be.

@Rewhbe ... was it going to based on the uplift of value per unit of energy ?

@Salinger re 2nd July RNS. It may be the case that Greenfield no longer operate the POSP, however, why would Petroteq not operate the POSP themselves ? Did they not recently post that they have production up to 500 bopd ?

As I understand they have a licence to "develop" the plant, I'm uncertain as to what would be required permission wise to operate it on a commercial basis. I remain hopeful that it will become the first operational commercial deployment of MSAR, though I'm aware that much out of the hands of Quadrise.

You could also look at if the other way Yanis. There may be HNW investors who wanted to cherry pick Greenland assets, who see the rump as the liability i,e, Horse Hill, Limerick and Gold Mines of Wales.

Does anyone know where the terminal for the abandoned chevron pipeline is ?
If the viscosity can be reduced to such an extent to allow pumping then could the pipeline not be used to transport the product

I believe the three weeks, isnt to tune the formulation from a combustion / viscoity point of view, but to prove the stability of the solution, i.e. that the heavier fractions do not settle. I've every confidence in the technical qualities of the product. The challenge moving forward is adoption.

The Amistoq results may be known by next Tuesday. Personally I would rather see the IPO postponed until JORC declared on these two sites, so that the basis of valuation of ALBA's contribution to Greenroc is higher, thus maximising the funds raised.

That concludes the fieldwork season for Greenland. Nothing seems out of order. Greenroc IPO should go on as planned

@dgdg1, I would have thought that the licence to use MSAR technology would be based on a per barrel basis rather than a lump sum, in a similar way that Petroteq's technology is licenced.

ETX capital are the brokers who are doing the IPO, the company will trade on AIM therafter

dewatering in the hands of NRW ... nothing more can be done at present
greenland ipo ... probably a lot going in
tbs ... probably nearing completion of fieldwork

If MSC are priortising BioMSAR perhaps they are thinking of trialing on a mainly European waters feeder ?

Everyway you look at it Greenroc looks excellent if only for Amistoq and TBS. Everything else is a bonus

https://imgur.com/a/0JSJ461

The post regarding possible pipeline to rail head for the unita basin railway is interesting, as pumping msar would be a lot easier than pumping "treacle"