Ryan Mee, CEO of Fulcrum Metals, reviews FY23 and progress on the Gold Tailings Hub in Canada. Watch the video here.
Or wildfires. There was one in North Scotland recently that accounted for a frightening doubling of Scotland's emissions.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-50435811
Don't think your choice of car will dent that kind of impact.
I don't have an EV or hybrids, but two recent experiences.
1. Hire car on hols last month was a new eGolf plug in hybrid. Came with no charge. No charging point at car park 200 yards from apartment. No charge points at any car parks we used in the week. Dash display said it had averaged 40mpg since new, and it did 20mpg from Aosta back up to the village. As an aside, all the electronic boings and dash warnings were really irritating.
2. Family came to visit us with a Tesla. 260mile claimed range, but in reality about 210-220. Nearest Tesla charger to our house - 50 mile round trip, although we could trickle charge it off the main overnight. Had a ride in it, and it said the 100 mile charge at a Tesla charger was £10, so mid 60's mpg. This sounds good, until you realise you could buy a 2.2 diesel Civic in 2012 that did 60+mpg (and a smaller cars in 2002), and you can still buy them for £4k, instead of £40k.
The charging infrastructure needs to get a lot better, the cars needs to be cheaper, and there needs to be a way of changing the batteries quickly and cheaply (as opposed to being part of the car structure). Other than fleets, company car users, and owners who get a new vehicle every 3 years, is anyone going to buy one when a battery fault could cost thousands of pounds?
With the BOD's track record of handling investments, I'm all for winding up and returning Ruvuma cash to shareholders. I don't trust them to invest wisely and keep costs down in the interest of shareholders.
Without seeing the terms of the contract, it could just be a spot / call off agreement. If we use your rig, this is what we pay. I doubt we have exclusivity (PG wouldn't pay for it).
I agree both options re timing of Mou5 are open. I think it will come down to whether, once results are known, PG sees more value in retaining cash as a defensive measure, or in expanding the resource base. I suspect that might come down to behind the scenes discussions regarding any possible sale / farm-in.
After, I would think. Need time to process the testing data and plan next steps. Commercial discussions to be had.
They can't sit on material news.
In some ways, the movers and shakers of the Kingdom may prefer to deal with Predator than majors, in terms of aligned interests and levers of power.
Thanks affc and Keith. I can't find anything on X and it was the bit about testing going well (i.e. positive results) that I was hoping to track down. Maybe I'm thinking something exists that doesn't, and it's just Chinese Whispers?
I've missed this 'unofficial confirmation that testing is going well' while I was away. Where has this come from, please?
I think autocorrect has replaced 'opinion' with 'option'.
I must admit to only skimming the ITR, and have been busy and away, so my recollection may be hazy but, is there the confusion regarding the Jurassic due to the modelling methodology?
From memory Mou4 hit 20m of which 2m is thought to be gas bearing. The ITR is taking this as 10%, thereby arriving at 20m out of 200n for the wider reservoir.
However, if the reservoir goes up, then is it possible that everything above Mou4 is gas?
Shows what a great job they did with the original smaller rig to get producing wells.
Change of President since then. Far more business friendly.
Correct. He1 have not looked for hydrocarbons - this is a pure helium play.
We have commercial helium, so it's a company with a USP. A market cap less than £100m. Bought some on the bell, and have some powder dry for if it retraces to 1.6 ish (the spot where placees can sell at 10% gain). I imagine there will be lots happy to flip at 1.9p for 25% gain in 2 days work.
Yep, got some at 1.9p as well.
Strengthens the hand in any JV negotiations.