The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Thanks for that cc, I will bear that in mind for the future. Haven't ever had to think about it before as I haven't to date done any buy backs soon after registering a loss.
Correction, I think I am wrong about about the B&B rules. But not convinced out tax losses.
I think you are confusing ISA B & B rules with standard capital gains rules. As far as I am aware you only have to sell to formalise a capital loss or gain.
I expect Lamps has smaller horizons than you. he was probably expecting the 20k to be the number of shares, not the price in £, and didn't see a 20k trade at that time. Had he applied a little logic and maths to the 892k reported at the same time you wrote your post though... So give the poor lad a break, now he is just going to be jealous :))
Not sure if this has been posted already, extract from the Telegraph a couple of days ago.
The China Electricity Council says the country will add 210 GW of solar this year, twice the entire solar capacity installed in the US to date.
It is not going to stop there. Carbon Brief says China’s output of solar panels was 310 GW in 2022; it will be 500 GW in 2023; and 1000 GW in 2025 – four times the total installation of new solar worldwide last year.
China is undoubtedly getting over its skis. The grid cannot yet absorb so much renewable power. Curtailment is a chronic problem. But it is equally obvious that China will not let that stand in the way. The grid will catch up.
The ramp up of battery capacity is even steeper: 550 GWh in 2022; 800 GWh in 2023, and 3,000 in 2025. That will alleviate the shorter end of intermittency.
@HarChris Fair enough, we might disagree on the merits of ICE vs EV's (at least in their current form for me) but we do agree on the merits of Li vs VRFB. Although to again be devils advocate it is possible that future iterations of Li or perhaps Sodium based batteries might change that equation to the detriment of this company. If so i hope it isn't in the near future but I keep a weather eye on such developments. At present I do remain confident that Li/sodium are only better placed for the instant switch on but very short term phase of battery back-up, and that VRFB's will remain better suited (even after developments in Li etc) to picking up from the instant on Li for the longer period back-up.
@HarChris.. The RAC report you quote was issued in March 22, the report I referenced was issued in Jun 22. So I am afraid that as far as up to date information mine is more recent. Both were carried out by respected organisations. So your assertion that EV pollution is a myth is not proven.
As for the cities that have embraced EVs having far less pollution? Do you mean the cities that have embraced ULEZs... you should note that those include all ICE vehicles post EURO6 emissions level... so not EV's, but all modern low polluting vehicles, including diesels, which nowadays can have better emissions than petrol cars.
With a new vehicle at the moment, the emissions are all low regardless of the vehicle type. The problems lie mainly with the millions of Euro 4 and earlier vehicles that remain on the roads, in particular the commercial vehicles of that era who do so much more mileage and thus produce much more pollution. Remove them from the roads (as in ULEZ and the problem disappears without going EV, but you cannot get rid of them overnight because most people drive second hand or older cars as that is all they can afford, and public transport is only really an option in the bigger cities, and not an option at all for the commercial vehicles that are a big part of the problem.
And because a petrochemical fire is easily put out, less fuel is usually consumed before the fire is extinguished.
Less fuel perhaps, but a hotter burn because of the oxygen supply
“Tyres are rapidly eclipsing the tailpipe as a major source of emissions from vehicles,” said Nick Molden, at Emissions Analytics, the leading independent emissions testing company that did the research. “Tailpipes are now so clean for pollutants that, if you were starting out afresh, you wouldn’t even bother regulating them.”
Other recent research has suggested tyre particles are a major source of the microplastics polluting the oceans. A specific chemical used in tyres has been linked to salmon deaths in the US and California proposed a ban this month.
“The US is more advanced in their thinking about [the impacts of tyre particles],” said Molden. “The European Union is behind the curve. Overall, it’s early days, but this could be a big issue.”
Guess what, EV's are heavier and produce more particulates from their tyres. So, still far from green, even leaving aside the production issues.
@bonxie Really.. little fuel !? since from now maybe in new cars (depending on the battery type) , but most that are already in cars contain carbon, and oxygen emitting liquids... so fuel and and source of pure oxygen.. a recipe for a very hot fire.. hotter and more difficult to put out than petrochemical ones. The result is more damaging to concrete.
A diesel Range Rover according to the fire brigade, it was still on the move at the time the fire broke out, video from a dashcam shows it. Probably a diesel leak onto the turbo. However the presence of EV's in the car park will have vastly exacerbated the fire itself and the impact on the structure.
Sentiment can change overnight given the right circumstances. if for example our govt made an announcement to say they were going to primarily use VRFB's it would change instantly. Getting the basics right is of course something that needs done anyway.
Share price is driven by sentiment, if VRFB's became newsworthy by becoming the gridscale battery of choice here, then the share price would rise.
I wasn't aware of it, thanks. Am listening to the debate now.
My point being that if just some of you spent half the amount of time you comment on here, in research on who your local MP, Planning chief, and HSEx representatives were and wrote to them instead, explaining the advantages of VRFB's, perhaps we would see the end of Lithium batteries and the start of VRFB's in the UK.
It's not dead until there is a clear winner. As I pointed out the West is seemingly going the route of Lithium despite all the obvious problems as highlighted by that fire, other countries have seen sense. The problem seems to be that the people who influence the decisions about battery farms and either make or audit the rules are largely unaware of VRFB's.
So I'm curious, am I the only one on this board who has done anything positive to try and further the cause of VRFB's in the UK, or is just sitting back and whinging about the share price the way forward?
Which do we think VRFB's will be and should we just sit back and hope for the best?
Well China are betting on VRFB's, they are installing shedloads of GWhrs. The West has blindly followed Musk with his GigaBatteries. thing is they are prone to fire, have limited lifespans and are not easily recyclable... whereas VRFB's solve all those issues.
Technically VRFB's make more sense, but will the West see sense? Or will it in fact end up being the technically better one that loses out as was the case with Betamax.
I sure hope the West will see sense, and I have written to various MP's, Planning chiefs and HSEx reps to try and raise the perception of VRFB's in this country at least, where those who can influence choices (by way of risk reduction at least) don't currently seem to be aware of them.
Where is your swimming pool in the UK? If it is in southern UK then yes you should have equal or lower bills, however if you are in the northern UK your costs would be higher. I made this point in my post. That is of course on top of your point about timescales.
I have no idea why the Finnish takeup of heat pumps is so much higher than ours. But if you look at the basic economics and efficiencies of existing air source heat pumps they typically have a CoP that drops to around the same as the price differential between gas and electricity (in the UK) at somewhere around 8 deg C ambient temp. So on that basis when the average temp here is less than that you are paying more to run a heat pump than to run a gas boiler. If the period you use heating has more time at an average of less than 8C than above it then you will be paying more annually if you are using a Heat Pump. In southern England that won't be the case, but in Scotland it very definitely is. New designs of Heat Pump are around the corner, and they may change that calculation. The only other impact on the calculation would be if the UK changed the pricing structure of electricity and did not lock it into the price of gas. This is all independent of the level of insulation you have, which impacts significantly on your total annual bill, and also negatively impacts on the CoP you can get from your heat pump because you need to run it at a higher temp.
ARCM You keep forgetting the point that was made by one of the other posters a few days ago that 90 odd % vanadium extraction is a by-product of iron ore extraction, so vanadium demand for steel is more or less self fulfilled in extraction terms. Thus when iron ore demand drops vanadium production drops in sync. So there isn't much of an excess to meet the non steel demands. That is where vanadium producers such as BMN et al fit in and why VRFB demand can keep the price up despite steel demand dropping..