Member Info for ps200306

BP: "Almost half of investors say they will divest from companies not taking climate action. Close to 80 per cent of investors said ESG considerations play a major role in investment decision making, according to the latest global survey from PwC."

RNS: "Richard ... has now decided that as the Moroccan Tendrara development project and the restructuring of Sound Energy are at a very advanced stage, the time is right to concentrate on his other ventures."

Couldn't help noticing the similarity to PVR which had a new CEO at the same time as SOU did, trying to kickstart a similar ready-to-go project which is stalled due to funding. He left last month, having:

"decided to step down from the Board to devote more time to my other business interests. Following the recent strategic decision by the Board to take the management and financing of the ... project in-house, this is the opportune time to hand over to new leadership. Providence is now well placed to progress ..."

It was clearly a euphemism for "thanks for the pay cheques, sorry things didn't work out but the place is now a total train wreck and I have better things to do with my time". I hope the SOU RNS is not similarly euphemistic.

Cephalo, if I understand it right all the wells drilled so far, including PVR's 2011-12 drill were vertical bores. They'll need to drill horizontally to test reservoir extent and connectivity, and those wells can then go into production.

Minde: "This SP will pump as soon as expected gas and oil reserves are confirmed. "

What does that even mean? The gas and oil reserves are as confirmed as they're ever going to be until an appraisal drill happens. Under an EDS, the appraisal wells become the production wells. PVR's perennial problem has been raising the funds (or finding a partner) for the appraisal drilling. Nothing's going to happen until that nut is cracked, and the political scene is no doubt deterring potential suitors.

Oh, and about trading the swings, no, I'm only interested in long term investing for actual value. Cashing in on the mistakes of less well informed investors is not my thing. (After all, I WAS one of them).

Mr_Wolfe, I've kept about 5% of my investment, so I am still here. No, not inclined to increase my stake anytime soon. SOU's future plans have been well signposted and a number of valuations have been produced. Parson's get-rich-quick scheme has been replaced with a more sensible plan to become a production company, with future exploration to be funded from revenue. Assuming the CEO manages to close the Phase 1 deals, he will have saved the company from tanking completely but it will still not be worth anything -- revenue and debt repayments will just about balance for the next decade. Phase 2 is the big money-earner but that needs a vast amount of capital. Given the glacial pace of progress for the last several years, and a tendency to trumpet "good news" long before anything solid is actually in place, I don't expect to see a lasting increase in share price for several more years. It may come good -- I hope it does -- but I I have no plans to add to my stake for the foreseeable.

goza172: "If we get the tax issue sorted and FID for phase 1, we will see a significant rerate on the share price, of this I am sure."

There'll be a rerate of the *value* for sure -- from its current negative level to ZERO. I've no doubt the share price will then go up temporarily, suck in the next batch of underinformed investors, and promptly deflate again.

I'm more inclined to think APEC was just an out and out scam -- a bunch of chancers who never really had any hope of raising funds but were willing to try for a big slice of the pie. The irony is that PVR immediately fell for exactly the same scam with SpotOn under Linn. But I agree that it's now probably too late. The odium heaped on fossil fuels was exemplified on BBC radio this morning. They carried the spurious headline that "fossil fuel companies sent the biggest delegation to COP26". At this stage I'm not just worrying about losing a money on PVR but that the Greenies are about to literally destroy the economy.

ranger4, toroil, I fear you are right. The government may not even have to drag their heels if PVR can't obtain funding in a market that abhors oil and gas exploration. And right now they don't even have a license to wave in front of potential funders. I'd love to be wrong but I am sanguine about the prospects.

The plan is to reduce emissions from 63 MtCO2 in 2018 to 31 MtCO2 in 2030. Assuming a linear trend in reduction, that would be a total of 192 MtCO2 avoided.

A barrel of light crude from early field production embodies about 470 kgCO2/bbl. (Heavier crudes contain more carbon, and mature field production with secondary recovery techniques can raise the CO2 intensity of a barrel of crude as high as 770 kg).

So in the very best case, Barryroe's 350 mboe would embody about 165 MtCO2, offsetting almost all of Ireland's planned emissions reductions from 2018 to 2030. Even though it would be less carbon intensive than the oil we would end up importing anyway, don't expect the Green loonies to follow this line of reasoning. Expect the opposition to include everything from tortuous legal cases to boatloads of crazies disrupting operations.

Sleepy Ryan has delusions of grandeur that the world could follow tiny Ireland's lead. If it did, it would spend $150 TRILLION -- nearly twice global GDP -- reducing emissions by 50% by 2030. Fortunately the world has more sense. But in Ireland a few years from now that motherfracker will be enjoying his government pension while half the country struggles to pay the electricity bills.

Some aspects of the plan vary from stupid to impossible. More biofuels and more organic farming -- both of those are BAD for the environment. A million EVs by 2030 -- how's that even conceivable? Every car sold between now and then would have to be an EV. Since there's going to be a change in ruling party, this is basically a trap for the next government who will have to admit they missed these unmeetable targets.

Irish Times: "Households and private sector to bear most of Climate Action Plan cost Plan costing €125bn sets out 475 actions to halve greenhouse emission by 2030."

That's €25,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country. And if it's successful we will have saved 0.05% of global emissions. Sheer lunacy.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/households-and-private-sector-to-bear-most-of-climate-action-plan-cost-1.4719879

No I don't goza, though I'm a computer guy so well used to projects that run over. What I'm more concerned about here is status updates that turn out to be misleading. Such as that the tax issues wasn't holding up anything, or that ItalFluids were all on board, funded, and ready to go. That said, I'd be very surprised if Phase 1 didn't get up and running soon. It needs to, because there are payment schedules contingent on it.

Fr.Quick: "The UK government however are dragging their feet with an extraction licence. It will be an interesting insight to the future of even well-organised projects in this part of the world. A similar situation to the potential scenario in Ireland."

We've already seen it -- it took well over a year to get the trivial Barryroe K site survey approved. Minister Ryan's attitude is captured in what must be his favourite song ... ???? "You say it best when you say nothing at all" ????

"my view is that we'll get a run of good news in the next few weeks."

My view is you're probably right. However, it'll be news that was promised over a year ago, dressed up as some wonderful achievement instead of a dismally overdue deadline that's already factored into the SP (bearing in mind that Phase 1 is worth exactly ZERO by SOU's own analysis). My guess is there's money to be made by buying at today's price and selling as soon as the good news hits. You could probably make 100% on a quick exit, leaving everyone else to lick their wounds and wonder why the share price always flounders immediately after good news. Same old Sound story for the last several years now.

Beat me to it. Malcy mostly parroting the RNS as usual, but let's hope he's right that Graham will pull the pieces together in the next thirty days.

Parties usually have a cause for celebration. Right now, I'm not seeing any at SOU.

"for millions facing increasing risk of famine, starvation, flooding, mass migration, the world definitely is changing, and it's not for the better."

Actually it *is* for the better. Deaths from every one of those factors has been plummeting for a century and continue to go down. Remember the flooding in Zhengzhou just a couple of months ago where they got a year's worth of rain in 24 hours? Yes, people died and that is tragic, but it was thirty times fewer per capita than died in the world's richest country during Hurricane Katrina. Among other things it's because China had the resources to transform places in traditionally flood-prone regions into "sponge cities".

Resilience is the key to climate change adaptation, affluence is the key to resilience, and abundant energy is the key to affluence. Green policies that put decarbonisation ahead of energy security are an utter disaster, and guarantee that more people will die from both energy poverty *and* climate change. We will NEVER meet decarbonisation targets on the current trajectory of wind and solar power.

The Greens are a bunch of zealots on a kamikaze mission. While they -- like you -- talk about the millions at risk from climate change, they are doing their best to make sure that those at risk cannot develop the needed resilience, and those who are already resilient will become less so. Climate change is a concern but, according to IPCC and IMF models, will represent a very tiny dent in global GDP by 2100. That is, unless we shoot our own feet off by scuppering our reliable energy supplies ... which is exactly what Green policy is trying to do.

I see no reason to expect a steady climb, or any increase at all. When Phase 1 contracts are agreed, FID taken, plant built, and LNG flowing ... SOU will still be worth ZERO. This RNS tells you that Graham missed his own deadline (yet again) for the very first step of that process. It's amazing that some people think that's *good* news.

I would also consider the list of things outstanding a bit worrying. The plant development contract? Wasn't that supposedly in the bag ages ago? Financing? SOU are leasing the plant so the financing is up to ItalFluids. We had a rumour a long time back that the financing had been obtained from a commercial bank, and SOU issued an RNS to the effect that it was none of their business and a matter for the plant supplier. Is there now some prospect that the plant financing is *not* sorted, and it *is* SOU's business because Afriquia Gaz won't close without evidence that ItalFluids has the wherewithal to build the stuff? And regulatory approvals still outstanding? ... how long can those take?

This all stinks. They've had months to sort out what were portrayed as just a last few odds and ends. The door is also closing on the possibility of FID by the end of the year -- another missed deadline carried over from last year. This has implications because it all but guarantees that SOU run into trouble meeting their obligations to the bondholders in 2023. They really need to get the finger out and start moving this forward!