The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
If I’ve got your maths correct though MT, 45 road cargoes would fill a mid sized LNG tanker (150,000 cubic metres)? Not inconceivable. And would require less to fill up smaller tankers, and they do exist in much smaller sizes…
Wacky,
Many thanks to you. The missing piece i didn’t note was the new location in the North.
Changes the whole picture, (subject to the commercial elements of trucking!) - thanks as ever for taking the time to post and fill in pieces for folk like me.
Hi Dissipline,
Just for good order, unless you know something I don’t, that road you mention doesn’t run to any (known) planned LNG facility? The plans for Nador as outlined don’t include gas.
The road spend is intriguing, but let’s call it what it is - absurd - to suggest anyone is interested in trucking compressed gas for export as LNG. The volumes required and numbers simply wouldn’t make any sense next to a pipeline option. The CNG concept is wholly suitable for what PG intends it to serve - ‘stranded’ industry.
Hello All,
Intriguing find on the road Wacky, thanks very much, and some great general discourse over the past few days led by GRH’s ever stimulating contributions.
My only gut instinct challenge on the road development being a massive signal of OHNYM & PG knowing more than all us shareholders is as follows:
- Road leading from a gas field to port at the coast would be for export? If this is the case, why not just begin a project to tie into the Maghreb pipeline instead? Would be a lot cheaper, and a more efficient way to export gas without the obvious limitation of trucking CNG.
- There is currently massive spend planning on the LNG and power gen side at Jord Lasfar on Atlantic coast (involving PRD as one of the interested parties). Why then would government spend loads on developing a separate export facility. Intregration of plant and civils for import/export would surely make cost sense?
Don’t think below link has been posted before (although I can’t believe that), sorry if it is a re-post, fascinating from an overall gas strategy perspective. It also pre-dates MOU-1 drill which might have changed everything!
https://www.whitecase.com/sites/default/files/2021-02/morocco-gas-to-power-project-eng-2021.pdf
I’m going to do an impression, see if anyone can guess who it is.
TLBLDN, first post. Appears when Sefton has gone off radar.
-Has large holding, and purchased at 16p, just like Sefton.
- Normally only invests in tech stocks, just like Sefton.
- Types random words in capitals, just like Sefton.
- Thanks Sefton first in his list of regular posters.
Sefton, is that you there?
Sefton, fancy another peurile tear up this Sunday, see if SP does the same next week? Just need Nici to stoke my woke.
Jokes aside, great to see some long overdue vitality in this. Plenty to come no doubt. All the best to LTH
Just to consign all the b&@£cks of this morning to the past, the only point Sefton correctly makes often is that such discourse distracts from the main purpose of the BB, quality research.
Therefore on the off chance any new investors are popping in, please focus on the research postings of GRH, Wackmeister, MEM, Obadhia (and more). A lot of this stuff concisely available on Reddit.
Mossma. I do apologise profusely for that. I’ve been drawn into responding in by Sefton doing his supercilious, sycophantic, sanctimonious silly sausage act.
I’ll simply filter him and stop all the nonsense. Sorry for the BB clutter.
Good luck to all LTH, we all want the same thing.
Sefton you are just not getting it. Nico makes very many really good points about the political/strategic situation and how that’s shaping to benefit PRD shareholders. The malice bit is the wish for a severe energy shortage.
Im very sorry indeed that the discourse has led to the involvement of others.
Sefton,
It is interesting that rather than address the direct inconsistencies in your ramblings, you just revert to trying to accuse me of being a troll.
You are correct, if you check your posting history, you did indeed express reservations about me on my first posts. They were not negative, they highlighted points about the CO2 strategy which have since borne out to be true.
I suggest you check my posting history. Some balanced thoughts yes but not one negative sentiment on PRD. (Why would I begin trolling at 5p, rather than the high teens btw?).
Your ‘protector’ act is so tiresome. Please start posting something other than baseless accusations (or the word value in big letters.)
Sefton I read your post perfectly clearly, and by extension of your words you very clearly indicated that Nic is insane.
You said “ No-one sane would wish misfortune on others or to seek to profit out of someone's misery.”
Nico directly wished misfortune on others (all of us living in the British isles in fact) with his wish for a ‘severe energy shortage’ in the post I commented on. So by your own definition he is not sane. (By the way, I don’t think Nic is insane).
I’m not ‘offended’ or seeking any apology. This isn’t woke or PC. I simply told Nic in relation to his one specific personal opinion that I found it a bit weird. It takes all sorts…
Sefton - being polite, I can only assume that your ability for comprehension has been compromised in your race to 1000 posts (only two to go…)
“Nico … did not make any statement that was not factually-based as regards the Ireland mess.” - How do you qualify the personal wish for ‘severe energy shortages’ as fact based? In your next line you go on to qualify the person you’re defending as ‘insane’ if evaluated against the merits of your statement.
Sefton,
This isn’t an attack of the woke brigade, PC, or anything similar. Just basic decency and values.
I acknowledge that Nic has been a prolific poster with some interesting stuff shared. Like I said in my previous post, I just find it sinister wishing suffering in some way to further an investment case.
“ I'm hoping for severe energy shortages this winter for our islands. If we go short the Irish go shorter, that's for sure...”
Nicidemus - I must admit that I find the fervour with which you wish for crisis, presumably affecting you and other people you care about, a bit bizarre and unsavoury… are you that desperate for this to come good? I want it to, and I’m pretty confident it will but I wouldn’t wish gross misfortune on others to enhance the prospects.
Hello PT, purely coming at this from a technical standpoint, I can’t see a more ‘fast track’ or ‘temporary’ development than what is proposed - subsea tie-back to Kinsale or tie-in to Inch. You wouldn’t use a conventional FSRU to develop gas, as it has no processing capacity on the topside. FLNG would be suitable but highly unlikely to be shorter or cheaper than the proposed development. Unless you liquefy gas there is no way to take it to market which is why gas in remote locations was (and still is) always flared or reinjected unless local economics or sheer resource in place make it lucrative enough to build pipeline from platforms to shore to transport it. That’s quite wordy, to summarise the only four possible above water development solutions below in shorter form:
Fixed platform - still needs subsea scope and the pipelines to transport processed gas.
FPSO - as above, needs mooring scope. Not quick or cheap.
FLNG - would not be cheaper or quicker than current development concept.
Gas2wire (floating power generation) - Nascent solution, would not be cheaper or quicker right now. Question marks for me about whether any concept would be suitable for harsh environment.
F&M, ignoring all the gubbins in between, to answer your question on whether the ‘bright spot’ reference is related to RSDD-H, the answer is no.
The bright spot is related to conventional seismic, think this has been alluded to in the RNS directly as ‘seismic bright spot’.
Hello all.
GRH, there’s no way you dont already know the answer to your question :)…
But I will highlight the difference between the two schedules in case it is any use to anyone. NFE construction is well publicised at 3 years as mentioned by LIH. Bear in mind that includes a 600MW power plant and 120MW battery storage - I would say schedule overruns almost a certainty.
When you evaluate the ‘doing’ part of PRD’s publicised timeline, then they can have an FSRU delivering gas in about 15 months from pressing the button - the remainder of the schedule is consents and planning. If Irish govt were serious about their need I am sure this could be compressed into a matter of months. Also worth noting that the critical path piece of equipment in the PRD proposal is the offshore mooring EPC, which will be a disconnectable turret design from memory.
I’ve also been toying in my head with some sort of CNG scheme in Ireland as a fast track first phase, servicing only industrial customers. I don’t have any feel for how the delivery capacity constraints of that model work with the commercial side of having the FSRU in place (eg could they deliver enough gas by truck to service the cost of the FSRU…)
NFE’s proposal has some serious content in it;
1) Building brand new power gen and storage capacity.
2) clear transition to hydrogen planned.
3) They are also playing the card of a data centre campus near the onshore terminal to utilise the massive cooling potential of the LNG regasification. This is a masterstroke in my book.
So - we have Predator with a quicker, more agile proposal that has zero new plant impact onshore and is out of sight offshore, vs NFE’s heavy hitting massive capex energy transition and industrial development play.
Both have merits and it’s a fascinating story unfolding. I don’t buy the David vs Goliath that Nicidemus promotes, but what I hope will prevail is that PRD is seen as a 5-10 year low impact stopgap whilst renewables back fill up to the required capacity.