Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
"climate activists for a free palestine" - one of the posters from a protest at liverpool street station. the climate contingent present staged a "die-in". i travelled from liverpool st. for many years and i would have remonstrated with the protestors if my journey was delayed. i doubt any of them had the sense to consider that one of the main supporters of palestine is iran who make their money from - guess which commodity? there were also "queers for palestine" who perched for the present the fact that many islamic regimes have the death penalty for ****sexuality. i'm no fan of israel but they are democratic and embrace personal freedoms that the protestors would not be granted in many countries.
labour leapt on the green bandwagon because it supported their election plans. there are several suspect politicians promoting renewables one being barry gardiner who accepted £425,000 from christine lee & co who were declared by mi5 to be an agent working for the chinese communist party. i mention this because gardiner only really came on my radar as an inquisitor at the trial of linda cook (a.k.a. 'environmental audit committee').
once in power i expect labour to push climate activism into the long grass as more pressing demands are made of them. the tories will have a field day as they will be able to use real figures for renewable costs.
*barry gardiner is extreme left of labour. interestingly jeremy hunt is also described as a left of centre tory.
I think you're right there Dumbly. On BBC Newsnight a few minutes ago they zeroed in on the OBR checking the Tories homework and there was emphasis at the chart for public debt as a % of GDP and fiscal headroom that they need to show going lower in 2028 and I suppose to reinforce the trend/message they extended the EPL to 2029. It is a measure for the here and now which is the run up to an election. I am more relaxed now - there is never a danger of politicians shying away from self preservation which trumps economics every time.
It is not necessary to believe in the overriding primacy and urgency of the energy transition or Net Zero to have a sincere and sound commitment to environmental issues and human welfare. The obsessive focus of public debate on one issue, to the exclusion of rational argument about costs and other consequences of such policies, is a disgrace for politicians, advisers and the media. All politics and policymaking is about choices, often complex and contentious. Net Zero and the energy transition are presented as being a necessity that does not involve large costs. The ‘necessity’ part of the argument is patently untrue – we can choose to set a target date for the energy transition of 2040, 2050, 2060 or beyond. That is exactly what China, India and many other countries are doing. The issue of costs is a little more complicated, because the argument relies upon a deliberate confusion between initial or transitional expenditures and average costs in the long run. For the avoidance of doubt, the average cost of using renewable energy is generally higher than reliance on fossil fuels. But even if the average cost of using renewable energy were low, the argument entirely neglects the very large initial capital investments required for the transition. This money must be found from somewhere. The belief that a country can simply incur debt of 100% of GDP to finance the transition ignores economic and financial reality. This is why the term ‘energy transition’ is so important. We have inherited a capital stock and an economy, built over more than a century, that relies upon fossil fuels. To replace that capital stock to use renewable energy instead is a project that involves huge expenditures as well as social and economic dislocation, plus the sacrifice of a portion of our national income.
source - : https://mailchi.mp/cd067d7b8405/former-world-bank-economist-warns-of-energy-transitions-fiscal-risks-201336?e=35cf3821be
Other countries are veering away from the dogma. Maybe an election would enable us to do the same. Both parties seem in thrall to the extremists. In a few months they won't be.
Whilst on Balkan proverbs I always remembered this one - especially thinking of Ed.
A body was found in one of the interminable disputes that plague the region. It had been abused and the eyes gouged out suggesting more than the ongoing dispute was involved. One man present said, "they say his brother did this" another replied, "Ah, that explains it."
haven't read this yet https://mailchi.mp/cd067d7b8405/former-world-bank-economist-warns-of-energy-transitions-fiscal-risks-201336?e=35cf3821be
The muted response (so far) from the industry suggests there may be an adjustment elsewhere in the fiscal regime that encorages new investment. I hope so because the damage and stasis the EPL has caused to the industry is pretty obvious. The Tories have laid the ground for Labour to bascically make hydrocarbons illegal in the near future. Starve any industry of access to capital and don't be surprised if it withers and dies.
Hi M - I disagree. The big drop recently was moving out of one MSCI index and into a smaller one imo. The extension of the EPL doesn't make much sense to me and I thought it was just politics being played but Reuters give it a kinda seal of approval so a high chance it will happen. That will impact the RBL models if it follows last tinkerings so will put further downward pressure on UKCS oil stocks. I cannot find any saving grace in this hostile maction. Why keep attacking an industry that is on its knees anyway as regards future investment?
Hi M - why the leak? Reuters are highly reputable and both journalists are experienced with good contacts. Something about it doesn't ring true though? Unless Hunt and Sunak have been baptised into the Green Religion then I cannot see why continually attacking the O&G industry and ignoring the necessary tools for the transition and energy security have been abandoned.
If true it will hit us again when we are still on the floor. Is there something else to be announced that is positive for the UKCS?
Hunt and Sunak must really hate the industry if this is actually about to be confirmed on Wednesday. It isn't even a vote winner unless they think it might get a few juststopoil or XR to vote for them.
One thing for sure; old fields won't be cheap as chips. They'll be paying companies to take them over. Will there be any buyers for old fields?
KO, my guess is It wouldn't look good against his lobbying that the policies of both parties are destroying his company's future. There is also the possibility that he doesn't have the funds.
Thing is Juan that if they commenced buybacks (say) tomorrow the price would not stay at 13.5p for long, Even the small sample of LTHs here is uncoordinated and I imagine that whatever does happen it will need the nod from the funds invested first and even they are probably aware that AB can do more or less what he wants with his large holding.
Personally I'd like a special dividend as a reward to LTHs who haven't received any return to date. I would ignore any bad PR it attracts by explaining that even with (say) a 2p dividend holders would still be making a loss. After that they could do what they like with a dividend/buyback split but I'd like a one-off reward in the here and now for being loyal.
I think that if they don't give a physical reward soon they'll see a bout of selling from PIs due to cash needs. Maybe that's what they want?
Agreed Dumbly. Politics are confusing everything this week and next. On Thursday's Question Time the "climate emergency/crisis" wasn't mentioned once and Caroline Lucas was on the panel. Didn't seem to interest the voters in Rochdale either except for the obligatory incoherent lone shouter at Galloway's celebration who missed with her shower of orange confetti and was ignored by everyone there. She was led away with the crowd chanting "Galloway". She was an embarrassing irrelevance and evidence of the dwindling support jso have.
Https://grid.iamkate.com/
Don't panic. It's only temporary. 18% from our friends (interconnectors) and 7% biomass which is mainly Drax I guess so Let's call it a quarter of our current electricity supply.
Https://brusselssignal.eu/2024/03/icy-blast-of-bankruptcies-loom-for-swedish-wind-power-sector-experts-warn/
I don't know the provenance but if close to fact the numbers are worrying. Perhaps they should move to the UK and collect bigger bungs except their biggest wind company (Vattenfall) is wholly owned by the Swedish state and that could prove embarrassing. Thank goodness they've got hydroelectric. In fact domestically they don't really need gas for electricity as they've got ample hydro and nuclear which means we got their next biggest export, Greta. She couldn't find enough to protest about over there so she moved to us where she was welcomed with open arms.
“But what I can say is that we have consistently been the only major party that has backed the North Sea oil and gas industry.” - says the Chancellor who brought in a windfall tax until December 2025 and upon promotion allowed the new Chancellor to extend it to March 2028. Thanks.
Hi Stevo, it was for the overall UK portfolio. The overall portfolio had Opex @ $36pb. I threw it in because some of you guys can extrapolate information from nuggets like this. My takeaway is that they're small and rely basically on Kraken and Catcher. If they do buy anything they will go to the bond market. I think we have a better economy of scale but there was little possibility of Opex going down with inflation over the past few years imo. net debt was at 0.9X
There are 3 articles to download here. Each very interesting. I particularly liked the one title 'Dangerous Fantasies'. I never realised that to please juststopoil we'll still be able to kill, maim and reduce infrastructure to dust but it will be done in a carbon-friendly way.
https://www.netzerowatch.com/all-news/net-zero-threat-to-national-security
Beware the eights of March
We actually moved up between the 12th and 29th of February. That isn't a bad performance bearing in mind the selling pressure because that is the usual reaction of what is actually a downgrading of value. The selling in what is a thin market should have exacerbated the move down. An optimist might say that a firm base is forming.
I also wonder if others may have used the increased volume this created as a smokescreen to increase or build a stake. Even yesterday the UT is kinda explained away but what are the other large trades following totalling 18m +
We had several days last month where large trades went through post UT. It looks like we might get some stability until the FY results on 28 March. We've also got the budget on the 8th and the Norwegian wind CfD auction on the 18th.
*on another note there was a Waldorf production presentation this morning. I watched because of Kraken. Nothing new except I learned they've got $700m of nominal tax losses and next year they propose capex of $10pb and Opex $40/45pb for 2024.
There was one item that caught my eye but may be minimal. "Loss of production insurance income" expected in Q1 2024. It could refere to Kraken and I wondered if we had any?
Why when I read this "What is the point of the SMMT? It clearly does not represent the interests of motor manufacturers or drivers. Instead it continually obsesses about Net Zero" did I automatically think of OEUK?
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/03/01/smmt-wants-more-subsidies-for-evs/#more-72009
Doubly appreciated CheshireLad. I don't enjoy indexes or trading commentary but you cannot operate in isolation of them. More than happy that you're following them and can give us a heads up. Agree with Modestus and whilst Indexes bring us a little interest they are only reporting what the wider world has done to our stocks. For EnQuest it is mainly Government policy which has caused the damage not the intrinsic nature of our product or our profitability. It hasn't done PFC any favours either. There are close ties (I believe) between PFC and ENQ and nothing would surprise me on future deals.
I think you'll be fine holding PFC just as we'll eventually pull out of this spiral as common sense and reality returns when the voters point out that being uncompetitive is no replacement for virtue signaling. Being colder and poorer whilst somebody with pink hair is allowed to throw pots of paint around and direct government policy is a vote loser.
Be Lucky