Member Info for romaron

Hi Dumbly - I'm waiting for a reaction from OEUK or one of the companies operating in the NS. The Tories are more interested in keeping their re-election chances on the life-support machine. The Tories see NO Votes in supporting O&G but so far the industry has been pretty supine but it is early days.

I go back to a question I asked AB at an AGM as to why we don't run the company into the ground and he replied "it doesn't work that way". Well, there isn't much of another option is there? We can facilitate other bigger companies off-loading their end-of-life fields which will give us a future but it is really the same result. Whilst we have the tax credits we have a business model which may be fractionally improved by today but this sounds like the death knell for the basin. I can't see any of the majors being interested with the paucity of potential profit accompanied by caps and little help in the really bad years. Heads the Govt wins; tails the companies lose.

We have expertise in what are effectively brown-field sites and where would any finance come to develop a Bressay come from? Why operate in an unfriendly environment for peanuts?

Where we will shine is as a kinda last man standing and we'll have something of a monopoly. In fact I foresee we'll actually get grants to help with decommissioning and sucking up the last of the oil - most will stay where it is. I don't see Bressay or Bentley ever delivering.

I was a little surprised to see Claire Coutinho seeming enthusiastic with what Hunt was saying. If people rush for the exit we'll do OK because we can't leave - not whilst we have the large tax credits. I see a reliable income stream for EnQuest and we'll make respectable money. Any excess will be because the Govt of the day is desperate to avoid environment accusations with old fields being abandoned willy-nilly.

True oxygen - we will have a cap whilst the renewable offshore gets a 70% increase in the next auction round. What really hurts is admitting that juststopoil have won. Still, hopefully the shale oil and gas from Argentina will help us get through a few winters.

I tried google translate because most of it is indecipherable to me and I cannot see anything that really benefits the industry. Releasing it today must be intentional as all attention is elsewhere but why? They used bury news late on a Friday but an Autumn Statement also gives good camouflage. All a bit too complicated for me. My conclusion - we are being punished more harshly than Everton who were at least permitted to stay in the Premier League. Definitely no parachute payments as this once proud industry sinks into the National League and the good players and managers remaining look for opportunities overseas.

Hi Dumbly - this debate came after the main event and was effectively the decider for 3rd and 4th. There was only a small crowd in attendance. Didn't appear to be any backing down by Ed and Coutinho did relatively well for a newbie. They both made an early appearance and then found somewhere better to be. Barry Gardiner again said WFT expires next year. Odd that he wasn't corrected (column 307)?

I have to admit I don't understand politics. I thought the early interchange between Coutinho and Miliband showed her newness and his belligerence and pedantry over energy and electricity. I don't think he is right either with 18%. Miliband is happy to spin numbers and let disingenuous understandings proliferate when it suits him. It was cheap. He would be destroyed if matched with somebody who does understand the numbers.

I'm jumping ahead here. and paraphrasing KO for the sake of his health (and ours) finally sells

"There is another future: a bleak world. Imagine it is a grey day; the last private investor, Kraken Oil, has just pulled out of the North sea. Those communities without the jobs to support them have disbanded. The right hon. Member for Doncaster North is explaining yet again why the Labour party has laden the country with debt. His mothballing of British oil and gas is seen as the worst handling of our natural resources since his old boss sold the gold. Norway, with its ongoing oil and gas licences, is forging ahead with its greener future. Meanwhile, jobs in Russia are booming. Our energy security has been jeopardised, as imports from unstable regions rise. That is the future we can expect from a party reliant on Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion for ideas. With an awful predictableness, this parallel world has once again proven the law of British politics: every single Labour Government in the past left unemployment higher."

From the 9 November debate column 285 : https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-11-09/debates/051073DA-E3D2-428E-8E43-5B7713EB681E/MakingBritainACleanEnergySuperpower

Love this: "“You can't preach temperance from a barstool, and the United States is running a long tab," he said.

source: https://www.politico.eu/article/cop28-climate-summit-dubai-unfccc-anti-green-backlash/

Https://mailchi.mp/ff62bb190274/70-of-africas-forest-is-gone-without-affordable-energy-it-will-vanish-199228?e=35cf3821be

Read Paper1. Africa's burning issue

The author, Geoff Hill, in the hyperbolic world of eco exaggeration actually knows what he is talking about. Desperate and poor people are burning down trees for charcoal. If it is the only means of feeding your family what would you do? Parts of Africa have suffered 90% deforestation.

There is a solution and it is fossil fuels but what does the West do? Forbids Finance for anything to do with coal (Africa has it in abundance) and O&G treated not much better. There is also a water crisis. Not water which most countries have plenty of but energy to pump it around. Johannesburg has 20X the water it needs but suffers regular shortages because electricity black-outs mean that the water cannot reach its point of use.

God protect me from do-gooders and evangelists.;

Not that important but I once worked for a Gary Klesch company when he was Quadrex and bought the company I worked for (RP Martin) in the 80's. He wouldn't remember me. All I remember of him was a big American smoking giant cigars but he did say something that stuck - "a company management not involved in at least two court cases isn't doing its job properly". He then moved off and got involved in bonds and distressed debt. His point is that you need to be aggressive and test the boundaries. The costs of suing is dwarfed by the potential rewards. As the say - "he has form".

Problem is though Stevo that if you're right they will just say that these costs were unavoidable as we move to clean energy; basically electricity. They'll add that the grid was like our roads and other infrastructure and all the fault of the Tories. But what is really concerning is that there is little chance of the O&G industry getting any respite as the O&G industry will remain a first stop for subsidising the renewables industry. Religions have been waiting centuries for a Messiah or the great Rapture so I imagine a few decades more of waiting for physics and science to go backwards and make renewables the great saviour of civilisation isn't that long a wait really. Ed Miliband and Starmer will NEVER apologise for lying about the efficiency and cost of renewables and the Tories went with them because it appeared a vote winner.

The only ally that O&G have is the threat of widening conflicts around the world and the potential oil embargo or blockage of sea lines. I also think that Mondeo man may come to our rescue. EV's are losing their attraction and heat pump take up is way behind schedule. We need to keep the pressure on and remind people what the politicians have been promising. Higher electricity bills will be difficult for both parties but Labour will blame the Tories anyway. A good signal would be for Starmer to remove Miliband from his post.

*I cannot see the Tories surviving but we might have a minority government or Labour with a small majority. If they get a large majority it will continue to weigh on the O&G industry.

Just spotted a hole in my argument. The wholesale costs also include gas. See what I mean about what an impossible task the breakdown of an electricity bill is.

We know that electricity bills will be more expensive than the long term average even allowing for inflation. The cost (in today's prices) is likely to be c. £100 MWh for the offshore wind component. However, TBF it won't double the price or even lift it by the 66-70% being thrown about with the new proposed CfD auction estimates. Some of you love numbers and it is imo impossible to do anything other than guess the impact.

This points out the difficulty in arriving at the consumer impact:https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/search?keyword=breakdown%20electricity%20bill

The wholesale costs which I imagine are closest to CfD's makes up appx. 30% so the overall cost to the consumer means the bill will jump by (say) 20%. Now if we play the renewable activists game we would stick with the headline explanation and confuse the average consumer by screaming that offshore wind increasing by 66 per cent and hoping they'd think it meant their electricity bill.

However, if you look at the pie chart there are other components that are probably unfathomable unless you have a PhD in maths and energy pricing. How do you breakdown "Environmental and social obligation costs" of 25%? 'Operating costs' might be simpler 16% whilst 'network costs' 23% are definitely going up from what I read. My stab is that the cost of electricity to the consumer is likely to go up by a minimum of 25% and probably closer to 30%. That isn't what we're hearing from the Tory or Labour parties.

To repeat. I wish the government would stop reducing my bills. I can't afford to pay them any longer.

Bombard your MP of whatever hue and ask "why aren't my electricity bills going down?".

It confirms that the Swedish delisting is part of the reason for the extra selling pressure on EnQuest. The numbers don't really help but here's my stab. The announcement on 5 September caused a drop of c.10-15% and further selling continued. Some private investors would have baled out immediately but inertia meant that many paused and made the decision to sell belatedly - the drip-drip we've been seeing. The initial sellers were professionals who may have stayed out or bought back in at a lower level. There is always a price and professional would drop their bids but not run away. The professionals would also understand that they could most likely quite easily open or already had an account in the UK [there may be particular Swedish pension/insurance considerations/complications) . I've read them on share forums but never really pay attention to what punters call a "shake out" but in this case there is an element of truth for once. The shares haven't been bought and cancelled. They're still there but likely in the hands of professionals; certainly in the hands of those with deeper pockets and a longer view. Most punters have given up on NS oilies. I hear that Gary Glitter is more popular. There has been a lacki of buyers and it hasn't affected only EnQuest.

I spoke to Craig Baxter and he seemed genuinely surprised at the price reaction and that was in early October. I called because I was more worried about losing Richard Hall. I didn't sell (bought small in fact) because I don't trade on these technicalities which are historical and will lead to cost savings.

Sometimes it is better to have confirmation that the selling was overdone by Swedish shareholders but it is easy to understand why many sold. What we don't know is where these shares are now? In the UK because the professionals would know how to arbitrage them through I'd think most likely.

The selling means we are cheaper than ever and with the renewables narrative changing we should see a healthy rise from here.

Good point Frac. I think carbon capture is a political gimmick and uneconomic but we can play along with them. I think it more a case that only existing NS operators would consider getting involved in it. Suddenly we're important. The renewable companies aren't interested in it.

To clarify an earlier post. I think that with Cambo and Bressay the exit by Shell and Equinor could easily be reversed if the politicians reverse their open hostility towards fossil fuels. The majors have the fire-power (finance) to get things done.

Good, concise points dumbly. Another consideration. Shell pulled out of Cambo and Equinor pulled out of Bressay. Could this be a tactical withdrawal? Because both could fall under "commercially sensitive" transactions it would heap more pressure on the political parties by narrowing their options. Do the politicians really want to go 'all in' on renewables?

It will be a struggle to develop new fields without the majors assistance. They help finance the divestment of end-of-life fields and who knows what high level deals are being considered. Energy Security is more than powering your EV.

This is closer to the reality "Demand for hydrocarbons, meanwhile, remains at over 80 per cent of the total. Exxon and Chevron recently invested a combined US$110 billion in long-term U.S. oil and gas development, driving home the reality that liquid hydrocarbons will be as indispensable post-2050 as they are today."

source: https://financialpost.com/opinion/net-zero-policies-colliding-economic-reality?mc_cid=3f9186b796&mc_eid=35cf3821be

Https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1725951110366544365

Not really sure but someone missed her medication.

juststopoil helping amplify the message behind her. Neither appear to be Palestinian and they're probably not Jewish either. Perhaps they'd volunteer as a hostage swap? I'd contribute to their airfare. Only trying to help.

I used O/T because this won't interest all of you. I watched a video where Niall Ferguson gives a much wider up to date perspective of where we are, globally. He blames the current obsession with identity politics on Universities. He is a lecturer so a certain bias there for sure. It does help though explain juststopoil and the support for Palestine by many young people and radical lefties.

He breaks the world situation down to 3 hot spots. ME, Ukraine and Taiwan. The video explains it better than I ever could but I'm left thinking that we are much, much closer to a major conflict. What if the carriers in the ME don't respond to an attack and their bluff is called? NF suggests that the US doesn't really want to intervene and if Trump wins next November, Ukraine is lost. Brits are jingoistic when threatened and I have confidence that Labour would respond, perhaps even more strongly than the Tories. I think the world situation is deteriorating and Labour will drop the posturing that opposition parties always follow. Keir Starmer did admit that governing is harder.

We may be close to a turning point with attitudes towards protestors supporting everything other than UK's best interests and the open hostility by the radical left to fossil fuels. I wouldn't be surprised if Sir Keir's advisers and pollsters are telling him a different story to Ed's account. I cannot believe that people are so relaxed with the potential for the ME to implode. Putin and Xi Jinping are watching.

The video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DfTlPY_UQQ

The original sunset clause was 31 December 2025 and extended to 31 March 2028. Honouring that is hardly the most generous concession. However, it does seem that something was said and may have leaked to the more febrile sector of the oilies with Parkmead and Orcadian both jumping much higher. We know that EnQuest is under a self-imposed cloud with the Swedish delisting and we weren't that popular before so our reaction may well be delayed. I also liked that he didn't mention the marchers that plague London at present. They're only an irritant and will disappear soon.

Wouldn't it be amazing if Labour was the 'black swan' that saved the NS O&G Industry? The Tories couldn't have done more damage than if they wanted fossil fuels banned and actually legislated against the Industry. Oops, sorry, that is exactly what they did do. Jeremy Hunt has imo caused more damage than any other Tory Politician. Promoted far beyond his ability by Truss and endorsed by Sunak.

It does though move Bressay and Bentley fractionally closer. I've tried to get a commitment from Labour by asking a direct question asking if Cambo and Bressay will go ahead. You can't get an answer and FOIs don't work on hypotheticals. Perhaps we needed a dying Tory administration to portray the strategic importance of home based fossil fuels and their utter incompetence that has become systemic showed how NOT to treat such an important Industry.

I hope the mood is changing North of the Border too.

Talking about his discussions yesterday in Aberdeen with the Energy Industry

https://www.globalplayer.com/podcasts/42KuVj/

This is most promising and without the hyperbole that we'd get from Red Ed. juststopoil are almost a spent force and have alienated the public [a.k.a. voters] Arguments based on dogma and ideology have not convinced the majority.

Keir Starmer seems to have a different opinion after talking to people who actually work in the industry. Too early to say but these are the first green shoots I've seen from Labour that accept that O&G is necessary for the transition and says so. Dare I say it - Keir Starmer sounds like a Prime Minister.

Listen - it will cheer you up.

(pressed wrong button) we may see a change. I've sent out a flurry of emails over the Labour visit to Aberdeen yesterday. Some were unaware it happened. Maybe that was the intention? There is a lot of political posturing - it's what is really going on that eludes us.

Hi Dumbly - there's a plethora of companies doing just what ECIU are doing. My daughter gets wheeled out in her field for comment on BBC, LBC and other outlets. She at least knows what she's talking about as she is an acknowledged leader in her field (groundbreaking and aimed more at Millenials and Generation Z) which rules us out. It means I do actually know a bit more than most how modern journalism works. Only old people rely more on newspapers and the BBC.

O&G still has and requires grey hair and experience. Jess Ralston has neither. I wouldn't waste my time contacting her. She doesn't carry a lot of weight and BTW neither does Tessa Khan imo.

You have Labour and the Radical Left now encouraging non-violent demos as they work better than violent. We now have school kids marching (is it holiday time?). Education morphing into indoctrination. I know Bethnal Green well and wider Tower Hamlets (my dad was born in Stepney). It is now has a large Muslim demographic but I blame media manipulation because what kid doesn't want a day off school. We haven't delegated education to the radical left yet but some are trying.

There is a wall of money going towards renewables and the demonisation of fossil fuels and anybody associated with them. The argument about cheapness (of renewables) is now being challenged but the battle has been lost on young minds. Luckily they don't vote or contribute much to the tax revenue and I expect the people who do pay the taxes (and subsidise the kids) to resist the blind stampede towards renewables. It has some of the Brexit feel about it. I was on the wrong side there and I recognise that I missed the feeling outside of London where there are many, many more votes. If labour sense a move away from renewables and acceptance of the advantages of a healthy O&G industry