Member Info for greygeorge

'...If it can work in Cheshire it should be able to work elsewhere...'

A declaration for the ages ! 😊.

Thing is, pickedpeck, a lot of posters on this board seem to think DEC is on the cusp of finding a saviour in one of these technologies. I think they're going to be disappointed.

And here you go, this one has something for everyone, lol.

https://theconversation.com/pumping-co2-underground-can-help-fight-climate-change-why-is-it-stuck-in-second-gear-37572

It does need new pipelines though, and the depleted gas fields are only about 30km offshore.

'...The captured CO2 at the site on Marsh Lane in Ince would then be exported to the HyNet Northwest CO2 Transport and Storage Facility via a spur pipeline, for long-term storage in depleted underwater gas fields in Liverpool Bay.

A separate application for construction of the spur pipeline and above ground installation has also been lodged and is expected to receive the green light at the same meeting...'

Pickedpeck, you know I'm going to put up something just for the sake of argument. 😁

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/what-is-carbon-capture-and-storage/#:~:text=There%20is%20not%20a%20single%20carbon

Here you go, asp1 :

https://www.ssethermal.com/flexible-generation/development/peterhead-carbon-capture/

Since the NG pipelines of DEC are specifically designed to prevent blowback, etc, and are geared to ensure gas flows under pressure in one direction, the re-engineering would be commercially unfeasible.

'...At present everyone is focused on wind, solar tech etc. to address the CO2 issue but what if someone came up with a new gas power station tech that emitted zero CO2 at a cost equal or les then current gas power stations that could pipe CO2 for storage. Now wouldn't that be a game changer ....... this should not take 20 or 15 or 10 years. It is expected to be live on the grid in the next 3 to 4 years in the US....

asp1, I think off the top of my head they're going to do this in Scotland, the problem being the source of the carbon dioxide has to be close to the final resting place of the carbon dioxide.

'...However just to be clear, DEC owns 11K miles of midstream pipelines. Currently they are configured to flow gas in one direction, out to LNG ports, large clients etc. Would it be possible to reverse the flow in these pipleine to put CO2 back into the ground etc. DEC has the infrastructure to do this- however is it technically & commerically feasable?...'

No, I don't think it is feasible.

'...Along come DEC with enough money to bail them out and hand them a happy retirement, but forced them to accept DEC shares in lieu of cash for part of the deal. A nominally short lock in period was promised were DEC committed to buy the shares back at 'market rate' if Crescent Pass wanted to sell...'

'...Personally I took it that Crescent & the seller of the new deal that's going to include $35M of stock, actually wanted to own DEC stock & that they either saw long term value in the shares or thought the share price was very depressed & that at some point in the future it would rise significantly above the nominal price they got the shares at.

Now DEC may view it that there in for the medium / longer term or they might think they'll sell out once the equity is well in profit either way doesn't really matter for what I think DEC's motives are .............. They would rather have issued Crescent with another $30M in cash borrowed from there lenders as that would be a much cheaper source of finance than having to pay the dividend quarterly on all those extra shares (close to 5%). Crescent didn't bite & held firm in what they wanted...'

Pickedpeck, yes that could be an explanation too, just like LOTM has his explanation, as I have mine. I'm not sure how what you say below though makes it an attractive reason to buy for DEC. I mean, they're inheriting the exact same situation.

'...One thing stands out in the Crescent pass acquisition, that is the fact their production doesn't seem to come with any hedges. In the current gas spot price market that makes them a distressed seller, and as such had to take whatever terms they were offered...'

More than happy to hold a decent conversation with those who care to partake. You notrex, yeah keep up the lowbrow stuff, I can do that too.🤣

Not sure what conspiracy theory notrex is referring to here. Maybe it's the conspiracy theory from 18 months ago, when the closing of the Tanos II deal has led to the 18 month decline in share price of 60% and slashing of the dividend by 70% ?

I mean notrex is sitting on his loss, and spends every day whining about it. He has the proof of that conspiracy theory. 🤣. As he reminds us every day. So bitter, lol.

Asp1 my point is, carbon sequestration is a legitimate avenue to pursue. However, right now, and for the next decade at least, there is no way in hell that DEC is in any position to take any sort of commercial advantage of something that is still in its' infancy. It's not even involved in any way in the dozen or so experimental projects out there. Where. for example, is the infrastructure that DEC would need to utilise to get carbon dioxide - in any from, be it gas liquid or solid - from the source of production to its' final resting place ?

LOTM, '...DEC to me are the winners in all of this & shareholders from the savings made etc...'

Did you feel the same way about the Tanos II deal ? I mean, the share price is down 60% since that deal closed, and the dividend is 70% down. Shareholders were falling over themselves to get in on that deal, as I remember.

Pickedpeck, there's a couple of reasons I believe this is another stitch-up for investors. fist off, the whole oil and gas industry in that part of the world is so incestuous, deals done with the nod of a head or a handshake, a deal that looks great at first glance for one party will doubtlessly at some point in the future reveal a counter-deal that benefits what was thought to be the losing side in the earlier deal. I think DEC has bought another portfolio of rubbish. the seller knows they're selling rubbish so took the best deal they could. This involved part cash, part shares because had DEC had to borrow even more cash, the lenders would have wanted to inspect the books a little closer. So, in this deal, both sides stood to gain immediately. What would have been unmarketable rubbish was disposed of, with a mix of cash and shares. The seller had to take a hit on the share price dropping as they dumped these shares. The near 5% influx of shares into the market has been mitigated to some extent by DEC giving priority to the sellers' holding (I posted an example of how this can be done a week or so ago with BATS agreeing to buy an individual holding outright).

How did it suddenly find all the 'spare cash' to increase the buyback ? Secondary or 'sub-prime' lending. Remember 2008 ? Looks like Rusty does, lol. Anyway, a weird aspect of property deals and financing in the US is the secondary lending market. When I lived over there, we flipped houses, and how it would work was a buyer was only able to borrow 90% of the asking price. But they still didn't have the full asking price, so on the day of completion, our attorneys, the sellers' attorneys. and a secondary lending company would be in a room in person, with the secondary lending company on the phone. As the contracts were being signed, the secondary lender would release the extra 10% needed, so the buyer had all the cash they needed to buy the property. The secondary lender was - by definition - only the secondary lien holder on the property if the buyer defaulted on their loan. In return of course, the secondary lender charged a much higher rate of interest to reflect the risk. I think that's where DEC is at, once they closed the deal, they were able to borrow against it, time will tell what interest rate they're getting this new credit at.

So why do you think me being cynical of a new visitor is coincidental ? I'm cynical of everything and everyone on boards like this...or were you being sarcastic ? If it was sarcasm, I'm genuinely sorry to have let it go over my head.

'...Oh, one other odd thing, you revealing a degree of cynicism about our new visitor. All very coincidental...'

Oh dear pickledputin back to the conspiracy theories eh ? Just when I thought we could both partake in a decent conversation. Oh well, I should have known better. 🤷🙄

Pickedpeck, DEC referred in the closing that the new shares issued would be 'subject to the customary lock-in period'...only there is no set 'customary' lock-in period. I think shareholders are looking at another stitch-up here, as they were in the Tanos II deal that has led to this 60% loss of value and 70% cut in dividends this past year.

Nobody finds it in the least bit odd ? A share issue amount just under the 5% reporting requirement ? A huge increase in number of shares being bought back ? Nobody wondering why a new holder of DEC is dumping them as fast as they can ? anybody in the least bit curious about where the share price heads once the share is no longer propped up (and I uase the term propped up very loosely in this instance, lol). Nobody ? All good then ? Okey doke🤣 .

'...Yes that was a much better buy-back figure 76,205 at £9.35

So that saved them over £76,205 because the shares they issued to Crescent were at over £10.40 a share & they also don't have to pay the dividend on any of those shares either.

They've now bought in around 290,000 of the 2.249M issued to Crescent ie around 13% in 6 days.

LOTM...'

'...Yes that was a much better buy-back figure 76,205 at £9.35

So that saved them over £76,205 because the shares they issued to Crescent were at over £10.40 a share & they also don't have to pay the dividend on any of those shares either.

They've now bought in around 290,000 of the 2.249M issued to Crescent ie around 13% in 6 days.

LOTM...'

🤔...🤣🤣🤣

Asp1, you deliberately misunderstand my point. I'm not saying carbon sequestration or capture is BS, I'm stating that DECs' bs claim, which is swallowed by morons like you hook line and sinker is that they can benefit in any way from such projects in any timeline less than two decades. But you know that. You bought a dog, can't admit to having bought a dog, and are now clinging to any straw thrown you by the dog.

Just like the magic solar farms. you know, the ones that DEC could build on the undeveloped they won, only at the same time they're telling everyone how great it is to be selling said land. Again, bs swllowed hook line and sinker by mugs like you.