Member Info for Lutra

ITM dropped below my average buying price yesterday so I've made a small addition this morning, buying at 233.54p per share (plus dealing costs) to bring my average down to 277p per share. Perhaps I'm an optimist, but I really can't see 277p being an unrealistic forward value for these shares.

Gitfinger, you say "this raising of the remuneration cap for ADVISORS ONLY with NO directorship responsibility risk". That is not correct. We are talking about Non-Executive directors. By definition they have directorship responsibility and in particular carry the Governance responsibilities - on which we, as investors all depend to look after our interests. There are currently four NEDs, including the Chair of the Company. If we are getting all that for a £150,000 total cost, then that is pretty good value. A slightly larger Board doesn't seem a bad suggestion and for that the cost will rise. I'd assume that setting the ceiling at £400k is simply to allow for future growth without having to constantly bring the issue back before successive AGMs.

JGB, the article actually says that 17% of ALL homes in Scotland are not on the gas grid. The proportion of homes in the Highlands (including my own!) is way higher - I'd be guessing in the 80% range.

Having said that, I'd be interested in what your thinking is on how this relates to AFC?

The wording here is interesting: "the timing and availability of funding sources is currently outside of the control of the Board and none of this funding is committed at the date of these interim statements"...

If they were thinking about a straightforward placing, then surely that would be at the control of the Board? It reads to me as if they are in talks with a strategic investor or a provider of loan capital and that the ball is currently in the other player's court.

I notice that this news item is sitting as the third "most read" on the London Stock Exchange site at the moment. That's got to be good!

The Archimedes screws mentioned (along with most of the run-of-river hydro schemes and the smaller wind and solar installations) are probably missing because they are below a cut-off. Including only generation above 1MW makes the task much more realistic and the output readable.

However, there are mistakes at the larger end, too. Perhaps the biggest discrepancy might be Hunterston B which shows as 965 MW but is now being decommissioned. Easy to understand that being missed, as the switch-off is relatively recent.

I can understand that the biogas plants near me might also be easily missed, but can't really work out why one out of three made the grade as they are all identical and somewhere around the 2MW level each.

Also there is something like 70MW across three 1950s hydro stations in the River Conon scheme that is completely missing. Again, this last is a matter of having one station out of four in the scheme listed - so the data has been accessed, just only partly listed.

Bilbo, Thanks for posting that link. It is really interesting.

One aspect of the interest is that it seems to be totally impossible to get any listing that is accurate. I guess it's in the nature of these things that they will always be out of date as soon as they are published. However, scanning the sites that I know about, there are both significant sites that are no longer operational and operational sites that are simply missing.

It's a better list than most, but it always amazes me that we don't seem to be be able to bring data of this type together in one place. How can there be any rational planning for the future if we can't even list what we've got!

Too true! I only need an 8% premium to break even! :)

LT, the problem is that while the SP is low, a "healthy premium" can still be low. A 50% premium would still be under 20p a share at present and I'm not sure terribly many of the small-scale private holders would be too enthusiastic about that!

LT Believer, an interesting list, but these are simply (some of) the Business risks for DVRG as a company. Investment risks for shareholders are different from this and share prices can remain surprisingly disconnected from company risks for extended periods. As a small stock in a Tech industry, DVRG share price is arguably as much influenced by world-wide perceptions of the Tech sector as a whole. If Elon Musk has a bad day, so do we, despite zero cross-over between the respective companies.

Number one on my list of risks? Hostile takeover before the company has had a chance to realise its potential.

Wacca, I think you are confusing generic health monitoring and site-specific water quality monitoring. At an individual site (and for anyone on a private supply), a dipstick test for presence of pathogens is useful for routine monitoring. A dipstick test for Cryptosporidium would be very useful indeed for monitoring small, rural supplies. The addition of PMMoV testing makes a very powerful additional test on water-source contamination, for example in rural supplies which might be affected by septic tank outfalls.

Hmmm...hopefully just coincidence, but my browser crashed on that link to the Chinese news (its never done that before) and the hard drive has been driving hard ever since... :(

I saw an ITM Transit van twice today. Perhaps nothing odd about that, I guess, but he was pretty far from home and heading north. The first time was approaching Perth from the Glasgow direction and I wondered if it was heading to SSE's HQ there. But I needed to stop for fuel, so lost him. I then saw him later, stopped in a lay-by just north of Bruar on the A9. So where would it be heading? Does ITM already have kit stationed this far north? Options might be:
Inverness https://www.highland.gov.uk/news/article/14227/sgn_and_h2_green_launch_inverness_hydrogen_hub_plan_to_cut_transport_emissions
Invergordon https://www.pocf.co.uk/2021/03/05/port-of-cromarty-firth-launches-bold-new-plan-for-highlands-green-hydrogen-hub/
Nigg https://www.scottishpower.com/news/pages/green_hydrogen_set_for_port_of_nigg.aspx

Garonne, there's a sting in the tail of that article..."The post I’m not touching ITM Power shares with a 10-foot pole appeared first on The Motley Fool UK." Says it all really!

Chippy, If I was standing beside a running fuel cell, I think I'd possibly rather have CO2 from methanol in the air I am breathing than NO2 from Ammonia.

In one of the pics, you can see the bottom left corner of a triangular yellow sign, could that not be a hazard warning label?

Indeed. I bought some Siemens Energy when it floated last year and despite being a relative giant in the field, it's graph is very similar to AFC - down 27% since April compared to 29% for AFC. (Although I am still 50% up on Siemens Energy purchase price, while my AFC holding is 105% up since purchase).

Governance rather than management.

Domino, quite rightly so! Adam is part of Gary's Team, no the other way around.

Klunk, the RNS announcement of the ABB deal said:

"Order follows the successful integration trials of AFC Energy's "L" Series fuel cell technology with ABB's energy storage and high power EV charging platforms over the summer of 2021."

which is presumably the Estonia unit.