Member Info for JEBR

@ralph, Thorn & Nick: sorry for being the tiger. I should have known better to acknowledge that the grass is indeed blue. https://williammeller.com/short-story-of-the-donkey-the-tiger-and-the-lion/

I'll restrict myself to purely sealion/RKH posts from now on.

I'm glad to read you acknowledging that human activities are contributing to the warming of the planet!

It’s true that the Earth has experienced rapid climate changes in the past due to natural events. However my point is that the current rate of warming is unprecedented in the context of human history. Previous rapid changes were often linked to catastrophic events, such as asteroid impacts or massive volcanic eruptions, which are not comparable to the gradual and continuous increase in greenhouse gases due to human activities.

The scientific consensus on climate change is based on extensive research and multiple lines of evidence. The surveys of scientists are just one part of this. The consensus also comes from the synthesis of thousands of peer-reviewed studies, expert reviews, and the assessments by major scientific bodies like the IPCC, NASA, and NOAA. The agreement among scientists is not based on a simple checkbox survey but on a robust evaluation of the evidence.

Climate models are indeed complex and have limitations. However, they are continually refined and validated against historical data. While no model is perfect, they have successfully predicted many aspects of climate change, such as the overall warming trend, the increase in extreme weather events, and changes in precipitation patterns. Models are tools that help us understand potential futures, not crystal balls.

As a scientist myself I can say that we are far from perfect and make mistakes. But we are also there to learn from mistakes, find mistakes of others and improve. The scientists I know don't care about power but mainly want to do good for our planet. The most common flaw in scientist is the need to publish and make a name for yourself meaning there are of course ego's wanting to become famous. I normally don't speak up with these things, but it saddens me that a minority of climate skeptics is seen as the majority voice.

@Ralph: You’re right that the Earth's climate has experienced significant fluctuations over hundreds of thousands of years. Natural factors such as volcanic eruptions, variations in solar radiation, and asteroid impacts have all contributed to these changes.

While natural variability has always been a part of Earth's climate system, the rapid warming observed over the past century is different in several key ways:

- Rate of Change: The current rate of warming is much faster than most historical climate changes, occurring over decades rather than millennia.

- Correlation with Human Activity: There is a strong correlation between the rise in global temperatures and increased concentrations of greenhouse gases, such as CO2, resulting from human activities like burning fossil fuels, deforestation, and industrial processes.

- Scientific Consensus: The vast majority of climate scientists agree that human activities are the primary driver of recent climate changes. This consensus is based on extensive research and data from a wide range of scientific disciplines.

Where to start ...

The overwhelming consensus among climate scientists is that climate change is real, happening now, and significantly driven by human activities.

The link between health and climate change is supported by extensive research. For example, extreme weather events like heatwaves can cause heatstroke, respiratory issues, and exacerbate existing health conditions. Additionally, climate change can influence the spread of infectious diseases. The World Health Organization (WHO) and other health organizations recognize these risks and are working to educate healthcare providers to better respond to them. This is about improving public health response, not about control or power.

While it’s true that Nobel laureate John Clauser has expressed skepticism about climate change, it’s important to note that the consensus view among climate scientists is based on extensive research and data. Scientific consensus is not determined by a single individual but by the collective findings of the global scientific community.

It's true that more people historically have died from cold-related conditions than heat-related ones. However, climate change is expected to increase the frequency and severity of heatwaves, which poses a new and growing risk. Furthermore, warmer temperatures can disrupt ecosystems, agriculture, water supplies, and can lead to more severe weather events, which collectively pose significant threats to human health and safety.

While it’s unfortunate that climate change has become politicized, the science behind it remains robust and apolitical. Efforts to address climate change are supported by data and research from a wide range of disciplines.

Climate change is a complex issue with far-reaching impacts. While healthy skepticism can drive better understanding, dismissing the broad scientific consensus without considering the evidence can be detrimental.

Personally, I really like the pragmatic approach around Sealion. We will still need oil for a while, so why not do it the best way possible and create a win-win by both being good for the environment and extract a lot of oil?

Congratulations TCM. I have always believed you were capable of such brilliance. The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type any given text, including the complete works of William Shakespeare.

What's your hat made off?

Just in case ... Read this to find out the safest way to eat a hat: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-safest-way-to-eat-a-hat

I hope you're wrong there godders. Public consultation of EIS ends in 4 weeks. And with the share price of navitas increasing so much during the last week, I would be surprised if that doesn't rub off on RKH. Yesterday RKH saw a temporary new 52 week high of 15.45. But I do agree that it's frustrating that it hasn't jumped up as much as it deserves. A non-risked value of rkh at 187p still seems far away. I'm really curious to the point of being impatient of how things will look like at the end of this year and hopefully after FID

Wow ... Navitas is flying. Another 3+% today. The last five days they gained over 12%. I wonder how much of that is in anticipation of sealion getting close to FID

There are several reasons why navitas is better off working with RKH than to take them over. To just name a few:

- speed: the faster this field is developed, the quicker the other surrounding fields can be developed. Every change causes a delay which in the long run might mean they earn less than when they would takeover RKH

- relationship: the way I understood, RKH has a great relationship with the people in the Falklands. This probably has created a lot of goodwill and loyalty. A takeover might negatively influence that.

- Sense of nationalism: RKH is an UK company. Always good to have a UK company when working in the Falklands

- business honor: a takeover might seem sensible in a financial way, but having the reputation that you're a reliable business partner is more valuable in the long run

- risk mitigation: especially with huge oil fields that will be opened up, it makes sense to have at least 3 companies involved. Due to Argentina's opinion, it's more difficult to find the right partners to work with. In a way Navitas is helping RKH to become a larger company by itself. In this way RKH can help mitigate risks for future developments in the Falklands

Chess ... I thought you, as a chess player, were used to thinking several steps ahead, so I'm surprised that you see "navitas taking over RKH as a no brainer".

Navitas is on a roll. Another record day for them. I wonder when the next news will come out

A close of 15.62 would even be better... Then the market cap is above 100 million

EIS is now in for public consultation and should be finalised in September/October.

FDP is already at FIG for approval. They said they will use several teams to assess different parts of it. Will there also be a public consultation needed for the FDP or is the FIG approval sufficient? Not sure how long this will take, but if there is no public consultation needed, my guess would also be September/October.

After these two, the financing package and FID might happen simultaneously. With Monument navitas secured the funds needed in a couple of days. I expect something similar where the sell bonds on the Israeli market. Untraceable to individuals meaning no way for Argentina to be difficult and very quick.

Based on all this, my best guess would be FID in November or early December. Let's see in a couple of months if Nostradamus has new competition ;)

Seems to get some traction indeed. Current volume after 1.5 hours of trading is already equal to the day volume of Friday.

Here's the article without a paywall

https://archive.is/2024.06.30-073358/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/30/falkland-islands-oil-field-exploit-navitas-uk/

In the video a windfall tax was mentioned. Doesn't RKH have to pay their taxes in the Falklands instead of the UK?

Thanks Rogue trader. Always appreciate it. This one is of course mainly about navitas. The main take home message for rkh is that you believe it's a 50-50 for FID to still be in 2024 (and otherwise beginning of 2025) and in general that navitas is reliable in getting projects developed.

Https://assembly.fig.gov.fk/executive-council/papers/category/627-06-17-june-2024

Different currencies make things confuaing. Current market cap is around £95 million. Current cash is around £21.5 million with another £55 million on its way at the end of the year and a final ???£20 million when Italy finally pays. That would mean that the cash + expected OM return pretty much equals the market cap. Fase one and two of sealion is valued at £1100 million. On top of that is the rest of sealion, Isobel and plenty of licenses left to explore in the oil and gas rich Falklands.

If we conservatively assume a six month delay, first oil should be reached in 36 months. Share prices normally don't move linearly, but if they would, it would add 4-5p every month from now on

Thanks for the correction!

Hi Matt, you wonder if making RKH a £640m+ company is possible. Sealion has been valued at over $4 billion, which would be $1.4 billion or £1.1 billion for RKH. So yeah, I definitely believe it's possible.