Member Info for julianb1234

Ferring, I agree with Introv, perhaps you yourself should do further research into that film you recommend. A lot of the 'evidence' used is out of date, for instance quoted solar panel efficiencies and lifespans are well out of date. Yes these sorts of energy sources alone are not the solution, the population of the west and the US in particular needs to get used to using less energy, not just the same amount of energy from a different source. But claiming big business is supporting a false climate change argument is nonsense, big business has been trying to do the complete opposite for decades, and it is big oil (Exxon and the shale oil producers in particular) amongst others that are behind Trump.
In any case, what are you suggesting is the way forward?

Compare long term charts, 1, 6 & 12 months to see if there is a trend in place or starting. Anything less than a months trend is not a trend.
Never buy something that has shot up on gossip/rumours. Spikes generally only last 2 or 3 days, come in on day 2 and you are too late, leave on day 3 and you are too late.
Be wary of shares that are in politically insecure regions (FRR) they are very high risk, only invest in them if you are prepared to lose the lot.
Try and think on what the future will bring... don't invest in dying industries (oil) unless it is speculative and you are prepared to lose the lot.

Great, DrA has cleared up the issue of cyclone feeders or not. NOT is the answer. Yellow's claim is thus just a conspiracy theory and out the window.

As an engineer, I wouldn't describe an Archimedes screw as a cyclone, nor vice versa, although the uninitiated might. Either process could potentially be used to feed, or perhaps even a combination of the two.

Dave1: Cyclone feeders will be a real thing, I suspect it relates to how they keep oxygen out of the process whilst still being able to feed the combustible material in. If that isn't successful then as Yellow says it becomes a batch process, for instance there may be some size limitation above which it won't work, or perhaps the process has only been tested in batch mode and the cyclones are still a theoretical step that haven't been tested. However he has provided no information on what his concerns are based on, allegedly he has done some research so if he would share that research and not just his conclusions, we could assess it for ourselves. As it is he is no more than a conspiracy theorist, spreading fear without providing any valid evidence to back it up, so until he does, he is no better than the 5G/covid19/antivaccer/Bill Gates theorists etc.

Yellow, please advise me/us what info you are basing your point about the cyclone feeder on. I am an engineer and would very much like to look at the info you have found/what you think the issues are, to see if there is likely to be any real issues, or if it will just be a scaling up teething problem development, which is a normal state of affairs for a development process.

You are misinterpreting me. I don't say he 'should' do anything, I say that for me to give credence to a post it needs to have some justification, it will be ignored by me if it doesn't. Ramper or de-ramper. Engage with either type and you just encourage them. Ignore is the best policy unless you really feel they have something valid to say. If he genuinely is just a de-ramper he wants to get attention and will feel he is achieving his aim if he does. It's like school bullies, they only do it to get attention.

You both presume I haven't been in it a longtime! I also have been an investor in PHE for a couple of years now, and practise what I preach, I just read and forget anything I don't see any validity in. It isn't that hard really. I completely agree that statements are best justified, and the level of interest I have in a statement is increased proportionally by the validation given.

In my experience if someone is merely out there just to get under peoples skins as opposed to having a valid point to make, it is best to just ignore them. If they are just out to rile people and they don't succeed they may go away, if not and they actually have a valid point then it may come out. So, if that is his mentality, by mentioning Yellow all you are doing is potentially giving him the feedback he desires, just ignore posts you don't see any validity in.

I completely agree statements are of far more use and validity when backed up by some justification and I take that insto account when assessing if a post is in my view of relevance, but many opinions or statements on here and all other forums are made without backup, and as long as they are supportive no-one seems to complain, so is that not double standards. Should we not be just as open to dissenting views with no back-up, either that or else we should criticise rampers just as much as the de-rampers.

It sounds as if you probably think I am biased towards Yellowf1, I am not. I am of the view that there are far more people criticising him and calling for him to quit, than there are supporting him. I don't generally support his viewpoint but surely everyone is entitled to an opinion, and some of what he says may have some validity. For instance I am still not convinced about the relative strength of the institutional support for PHE and feel the reality sits somewhere between the two opposing views of Yellow and DrA.

ShareNewby95 I wouldn't say that he is being shameless, perhaps he feels that battery storage is the future not hydrogen, which is fine to have as an opinion. Personally I believe that both are the future. We need battery storage (I am in BMN and IES as well as PHE and ITM) for back-up power for the grid, and there is also a place for hydrogen for the gas grid and for fuel cell vehicles for long range. There is also a place for Ammonia which has a much better energy density than hydrogen. Ammonia is still largely off people's viewfinders and as yet I haven't found a suitable company to invest in, the first place it will be used is in marine situations.

I agree with the view that Yellowf1 is probably unhappy at having sold out and missed a chunk of profit and is casting aspersions as a result, but I don't agree with the mentality of just wanting to read views that bolster ones own hopes and banning those that don't, many a dictator has found out to his cost that what the sycophants tell him doesn't reflect reality. To me opposing views are always worth having around to avoid getting in a self promoted rut. I, like most on here, would be extremely happy if this rises to 8p or higher, but as an engineer I have personally seen a number of cases where an experimental scale system is scaled up to production sizes and either fails completely or has major development work required to get it running properly. So don't assume there is no risk at all in the scaling up process, however on the very positive side, the fact that similar processes exist elsewhere at production scale means that failure is very unlikely (otherwise I would not have such a large stake of my savings here), but significant additional development work to ensure we comply with such things as emissions criteria is not necessarily unlikely.

When you try to post a link, and it removes it, try replacing the first 'h' in http.... with a capital 'H'. It should hopefully post then.

Hi GFD Have you seen how much administrators charge an hour... £500 per person/hr is the order of costs... and they will stretch things out to increase their charges. If there are two that is £300k a month+ Our directors look cheap at that price. Only winners in administration are the administrators, Certainly not the shareholders. Never had a penny out of any companies that I had shares in that went into administration. New directors needed, but to get the turbines running at full output, not to go into liquidation. Julian

Is anyone totting up how many us PI's hold? I have a smidgeon over 3M and am an LTH.

I can see why that appeals, but the only winners if the liquidators come in are the liquidators. Have you seen their charging rates... £500+ an hour each, and they don't come alone, and would take a year or more at those rates.

Perhaps, but when I tried to do it those weeks ago the market wasn't accepting a sell order of my size, so I would have had to go to a limit, which would have slowed it down, which is perhaps what happened to him. I haven't tried selling to check the market size today.

I was replying to the first entry on this topic, got piggy backed.

The trader is probably switching his holding into an ISA or SIPP and recording a capital loss against other gains in their standard account. I tried to do likewise a month or so back but failed to sell, suits me fine either way.