Member Info for Pdub

Wyndrum I am not quite sure what you are saying. Seems to read “climate change is just a fact of life … live with it”. Needless to say I completely disagree if I have understood you correctly.

Quite apart from the questionable morality of not caring what happens to communities all around the world as a consequence of industrialisation, many of whom have seen little benefit let alone been the cause, there is a wider issue.

Climate change is not just an issue for the human population of the planet. It is impacting all ecosystems. Animal and plant communities have no say in their future and it is our responsibility to try to reduce the impact of CO2 emissions in order to protect the biodiversity on this planet.

If one can’t accept any other reason then we need to consider the legacy that we leave for future generations.

KotC interesting moniker. Are we meant to think you know what you are talking about … after 4 posts?

I think you may be entering a period of learning about MMs.

(Continued)

Note I have not mentioned battery storage. The above opinions I have held for many years partly derived from one aspect of my work. They predate by many years when BMN was formed as a company and when I first heard about VRFBs.

Julian thank you for your response.

Just for you this is an extract from NatureScot … Scotland’s Nature Agency. Note not a commercial organisation selling solar, in fact just the opposite really. This extract shows what they are expecting re solar farms … in Scotland!

“This guidance provides NatureScot’s standing advice on natural heritage considerations for large-scale, commercial solar photovoltaic (PV) proposals.  It aims to assist applicants, developers and consultants involved in preparing applications and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports (where these are required) for such developments.  It also provides advice on opportunities for mitigation and enhancement so that the approach to development delivers overall positive effects for biodiversity.  This guidance should be read in conjunction with any planning authority guidance on solar energy development.

The combination of the climate emergency, improving technology, reduced costs and in some cases the benefits of co-locating with other renewable energy developments appears likely to lead to an increased interest in solar farm proposals in Scotland.  We will continue to learn from case experience and update this guidance as required.”

Note they are expecting an increase in solar farm applications. One reason mentioned is improved technology.

There is no single answer to the challenges of global climate change. There is no single answer to the UK’s desire to move away from a carbon based economy, particularly where energy and transport are concerned. There is no single renewable that will replace oil and gas in the UK economy. Our need to find energy security will not be satisfied by a single renewable solution.

We will need to utilise every viable renewable energy source available in the UK. And yes that means that areas where solar is less efficient than in say the south of England will still get some solar farms. And yes that means that even in areas where other forms of renewables may be more efficient there will still be solar farms if commercially viable.

Why? Because the UK is switching from carbon to electricity eg ICE cars to electric vehicles. Even if total energy demand does not rise there will be a huge increase in the demand for electricity. Therefore the country will need to maximise its use of renewables, wherever that may be. We are likely to need over capacity in order to maintain supplies during periods of light winds or in the case of solar seasonal variation.

Of course the above is in no way exhaustive of the measures necessary for future sustainable energy security in the UK. I could write a book on that. But they are the points I consider relevant to our discussion.

So expect more solar farms in Scotland is my opinion. I wouldn’t expect the % of Scotlands electricity to be high from this source of generation but it will be a part of the picture.

(Continued)

Solar in Scotland and “the North!”.

“Despite the country's latitude, solar panels work perfectly and are highly efficient in Scotland. Solar panels are therefore playing an increasingly important role in Scotland's renewable energy market.”

https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/solar-energy/solar-panels/solar-panels-in-scotland

“Although some people are sceptical about how effective solar can be in a country not known for having lots of sunshine, commercial-scale solar farms do work in Scotland and are playing an increasingly important role in Scotland’s sustainable energy mix. Surprisingly, Scotland gets a similar amount of irradiance to Germany, which has the largest PV market in the world. “

https://www.solarfeeds.com/mag/the-biggest-solar-projects-in-scotland/

(Continued)

I am not advocating using prime agricultural land for solar farms but there is an urgent need for long term solutions for UK energy supplies. The more restrictions placed upon renewables such as the nimbyism relating to onshore wind and unnecessary planning restrictions on solar farms then the harder and more costly that task becomes.

Just my opinion.

(Great thread title. Love it)

I don’t think anyone is suggesting “Do we need the entire Cotswolds or Cumbria covered in solar panels, bloody hope not.” Bit of an over reaction!

However we are facing a serious climate crisis and more specifically the UK needs to find solutions to the threat to 24/7 energy supply whilst at the same time global gas prices are forcing electricity prices up and in response massive Government borrowing to limit the cost to consumers. Drastic and longterm action is absolutely essential.

That involves a shift away from hydrocarbons and renewables will be critical to that. There is no single solution at present to this crisis. The UK is fortunate to have the potential to develop a range of renewable energy sources including onshore and offshore wind, solar, wave and tidal. Whether we have a Government that is sufficiently forward thinking to encourage the development of these energy sources and the industrial opportunities associated with them is very open to debate.

Modern solar panels certainly do not need to be located in tropical places to be a viable part of energy infrastructure. Any farmer would be wise to diversify their operations. If dedicating a part of their land to solar makes financial sense and helps the country meet its energy needs then that is likely to happen.

I certainly agree that wind offers huge opportunities for generation of electricity in the UK and the most efficient locations are offshore. However these turbines are expensive to build and maintain so an expansion of the onshore wind operations is likely to be necessary to ensure that we have the generation capacity to meet our needs during periods of lighter winds.

As for grazing among solar panels this is an interesting read:

https://www.bre.co.uk/filelibrary/nsc/Documents%20Library/NSC%20Publications/NSC_-Guid_Agricultural-good-practice-for-SFs_0914.pdf

Of particular relevance:

“Larger farm animals such as horses and cattle are considered unsuitable since they have the weight and strength to dislodge standard mounting systems, while pigs or goats may cause damage to cabling, but sheep and free-ranging poultry have already been successfully employed to manage grassland in solar farms while demonstrating dual-purpose land use.”

As for this statement:

“The only reason some here are even thinking turning farm land into solar farms is a good idea is because they hope it will result in more VRFBs.”

Really? I can’t speak for others but throughout my career going back over 30 years I have been involved in promoting renewables. That pre dates my involvement with BMN by decades! And BMN have stated that any direct involvement with VRFBs will be restricted to SA and the African continent … not the UK.

(Continued)

That is a valid opinion faramog but are you the best person to judge what farmers should do with their land?

I understand your point and it makes sense. However farming is a tough business both physically and financially. Most farmers would want to continue farming but if diversification is necessary to maintain a profitable business and it fits with our need for clean energy that cannot be dismissed.

Perhaps farmers are intelligent enough to work what is the best use of their land?

Very well put Alex.

Worryingly Mark her incompetence knows no bounds!

Because it affects costs in a good way for BMN and therefore margins. Do you think profitability might just affect the sp when good financials get reported?

DD is that the same asset that made BMN one of the fastest rising shares in both 2017 and 2018 due to the huge profits it was returning? And the asset that for the last 4 Qs is on target and reducing costs and that is doing so well that they have just increased its production target?

Things rarely go in a straight line DD and the plant has had to take the rough with the smooth, but it seems to me that Vametco is doing ok.

Yep he was certainly impressed, as we all were.

Remember how important Brits is to the long term future for Vametco. It is the along strike continuation of the Vametco vanadium resource. It is likely to extend mine life at Vametco for decades to come. Hugely important for BMN

pb940 I think that was the initial Vametco deal, not Lemur, that JM was referring to.

But given how much cash Lemur had in bank and that they were negotiating for Brits vanadium which BMN then concluded it was a decent deal in its own right.

Of course at the time the coal project looked like it had good potential too. Only later events call that into question.

Even the Paris climate agreement allowed poor countries like Madagascar to proceed with coal projects. And it may still happen. That country has suffered years of drought (ironically do to climate change) and there is widespread poverty. Lack of access to electricity is a huge issue for the population. There is a desperate need for power generation. Whether the Imaloto project is one part of the solution now it is difficult to be sure but it can’t be rulespd out just yet.

Frankly judging whether this is a good or a bad deal will only be possible at some point in the future when we have evidence from where this arrangement ends up. ie Reverse takeover etc and market reaction to it.

Some here seem to be pre-judging that (not wise) particularly when they do not necessarily understand all expects of this deal.

The deal is a fact of life whether people like it or not.

Couldn’t come at a better time as BMN push up Vanchem output from Kiln 3.

Nothing certain of course but imagine hitting that run rate of 5000 mtV by year end just as V price is rising.

If FeV from Evraz is now limited by sanctions that could be a very interesting supply side issue for Europe. Essentially the other sources are Glencore, Largo and …. Bushveld.

Not easy to fill any supply side shortage.

Very fair point

I have emailed Mr Meyer about this error.

Is it me or have SPAngel made a rather serious error?

“Operating profits rose to $6.1m vs $19.9m yoy.”

Surely that should read:

“Operating profits rose to $6.1m vs a loss of $19.9m yoy.”

I think this is very important. An improvement of $26m is a huge achievement and their report completely messed it up. Very annoying.