Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Mate, that's a load of tosh.
'In this country we have got grass, and grass can be produced very easily on land where you cannot grow crops. And this land will produce some of the top quality proteins: beef and lamb. And it’s done in a sustainable, regenerative and very environmentally-friendly way.'
That "Grass" would most likely have been forest or some other biome which would act as a better reserve for biodiversity and as a carbon sink. I've got heathland near me which needs to be slash and burned every so often to maintain it for livestock and for a few isolated sand lizards whom seem to have got trapped there historically. This stops birch and pine trees from growing which help suck up a lot of the excess water and helps to reduce flooding (which in my area, is becoming more of an issue). Whilst pasture fed beef may be more enviromentally benifiecial than intnsive farming methods, it does not mean it is nessisarly ecologically more friendly. Now, organisms have adapted to man-made ecosystems over time meaning that returning to traditional farming practices would potentially help restore some biodiversity and going full throttle of rewilding may cause problems because of the speed and other factors needed to be taken into consideration to succesfully do it (if possible given current social and economic restraints). It is a complex issue and doing anything may have a lot of consequences (intended or otherwise).
This just seems to be more reactionary culture war BS (not suprised, it's the telegraph) that is more concerned with pushing an agenda rather than showing "them the facts and give them the opportunity to make up their own minds". I mean I might as well be listening to a guy down the pub about ecology than the guy they interviewed. Farmer's aren't ecologists, they are farmers who expertise is in producing livestock and crops to sell. They have a diffrent set of understandings and commitments govening what they do.
I think it is Asia where sub-coal is going to be used. China's building more coal power plants, which is not ideal. From what I remeber, China has planted loads of trees over the years. The problem is, is that those specific trees used have produced ecological dead zones where forests are pratically silent. This is a problem which is trying to be rectified in china now. Now, it is possible to cut down those trees and replace them with trees and other vegitation which would be more favourable to that regions biodiversity. I could see something like that working with subcoal in the short term.
@Silentalker
Thanks. I think investors should start mentally preparing themselves for the potential of Uskmouth Decommision. I am willing to take the hit if things go south. I am wondering however, if it is possible to simpley leave Uskmouth as a dead asset so to speak, such that we don't actually do anything with it other than the bare minimum OR if there would be legal prescriptions saying that we have to decommision it within a certai timeframe. If this is so, it begs the questions as to the timeframe in which they expect Uskmouth to be fully decommisioned. If Simec can draw the process out as long as possible, the less damage Uskmouth can have on its finances (if things go south). I'm feel more favourably about the SP in the short term, but middle to long term here I think an investor would need a great appertite for risk.
I'm of a hope for the best, prepare for the worst mentallity.
'Unique seems to equal rewarding on AIM'
That actually seems to be a very good heuristic based on my experience of AIM. Granted, not an optimal strategy but it has worked well enough for me to make decent profits in the long run (so far).
The same as me then. Yes, this is why I get the feeling that NAV might not be such an issue. You'll get "useful idiots" like myself whom will buy on ethical grounds. To be honest, the technology reduces a) animal suffering b) loss of biodiversity and c) reduces methane and carbon emissions by being less energy intensive. You can't spend money if you are dead, and the way I see it either you don't make any money yet help a good cause or you do make money and help a good cause.
NAV will be an issue, but so will be the underlying sentiments and commitments of those investing.
I was never a firm believer in the concept of true value, as I don't believe in truth. However, that's me just being a pedantic prat (my apologies). NAV is a more substantive form of value, and is probably the most stable indicator of what a companies value is in the face of speculation. As for how often the re-value their assets, I'm afraid I get the sense of it being only when it suits them. The last time they did it, it seemed more geared up to maintain or push the share price up so as to comfort current and potential investors rather than anything rigorously planned. It's going to have to be up to use to approximately estimate the current NAV based on what we know until they declare it themselves to re-value for us.
The real fun has yet to begin... Although, when it will begin is another matter.
That is, if it will follow Tesla and other similar companies. In the here and now, I'm cautiously optimistic but Absolutum Obsoletum: current predictions are always out of date.
It reminds me of ITM, whereby a piece of positive news either related or semi-related to the company would generally push up the share price regardless of the fundamentals. Since that last piece in the FT, there seems to have been a sustained increase into a new historical maximum price. This is definitely a stock priced for the future rather than the present. The one concern is that it relies too much on sentiment, intuitions and passions of the investor to keep the price up; although, it is not that much of a concern at the moment because the general feeling around the sector is positive. However, it will take a bit of a hit if the companies ANIC have invested in come into problems either in the R&D phase or regulatory phases. Still, there should be enough diversification in the company such that if some gambits fail; other should succeed.
The raise could be an issue. Mellon does not want it to be under his entry price, hence why he gave ANIC a small loan to prevent further dilution. Personally, even if it is diluted I don't think it is that much of a concern in the medium to long term.
Right now, it's overvalued but that does not mean that the price will necessarily go down as it is more reliant on the sentiment of activist investors whom are more likely to stabilize the price. The fund's very diversified, but it's big hitter (at least what it looks like at the moment) will most likely be BlueNalu. They are awaiting regulatory approval and are in the midst of getting their production facility up and running. They've had a fundraise of 60 million dollars I believe around the beginning of the year, so are well financed. Subject to FDA approval (the main variable of concern), it is likely that BlueNalu will be operational sometime during this year and have a product they can sell. The cost of such a product will be expensive, but that will come down over time. I need to look into Supermeat and Mosa Meats a bit more, but for now I'm focused on BlueNalu.
In my view, the rate in which the meat can grow in lab setting (for example, supermeat chicken doubles in mass every couple of hours) means that Lab-Grown meat will become increasingly viable as a product in the next next few years in my opinion. Things could go wrong a la Sod's Law, but if they do it is because of unknown unknowns rather than known unknowns as a rule of thumb in my opinion
Articles a month old, but has an interesting map of the potential places such tidal turbines could be deployed in. Because of Rockall, British Territorial waters are expansive as well. I do get the intuition that there is going to be progress on the tidal front this year one way or another.
https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/tidal-power/103182/