Member Info for romaron

sorry - omitted the (missed) date for 100% full-fibre broadband coverage. It is (was) 2025. My daughter in SE15 gets worse internet than people in the Orkneys. She is looking to move.

"Various attempts over the past 15 years have tried and failed to make carbon capture a reality in the UK. And the big problem for the oil giants is that without carbon capture and storage, their dreams of producing hydrogen from their vast gas reserves evaporates." ST today with the summary "The oil giants have no choice: without hydrogen, the days are numbered for natural gas." I'll have a guess at that number 18,250 days!
BTW- cheapest hydrogen is by steam reforming which in 2019 accounted for 830mio tons of CO2 (3% of energy-related emissions.) Juan that is "blue" hydrogen but there are great hopes for a newcomer called violet hydrogen which requires "fairy dust" but the secret is elusive and the amount to sprinkle varies. A new company called "Tinkerbell Dreams" is doing well on AIM I hear
On a serious note. If timescales are missed do you really think the Government won't extend timelines? The Tory 2019 manifesto promised 100% full-fibre gigabit capable broadband. That has now been scaled back to 85% and a Commons committee recently warned that even that scaled down target risks being missed. ST today.

*China own Uk assets:
Hinkley Point 33.5%
UK Power Networks £6.3bn
Cadent Gas 10.5%
Neptune Energy 49%
Tal9isman NS 49%
Dudgeon wind farm 30%

Hi L7 you wrote "I see much talk here about the world's reliance on oil products for decades to come. "
I see just as many posts suggesting that the solutions are due any moment now with renewables. Well they ain't!
This crazy thing called "blue" hydrogen. You take and burn a fossil fuel and turn it into something cleaner at great expense. That's clever! I've been involved in renewables one way or another for 15 years and they haven't advanced anywhere at the pace the evangelists say. Throw enough money at a product and penalise or make the fossil industry pay is a route to success but at a huge economic cost. The public have no idea and it will be hidden from them for as long as possible. Huge amounts of tokenism going on but the majors have escaped censure (for now) after the Q1 earnings release. Can't see any of the ESG companies matching those returns. Oh sorry; it's not cash flow but "potential" and I don't get it.
Why not pick on the cement industry? just watching Bloomberg and it's ammonia now the miracle fuel.
as for Goldman I respect Jeff Currie's view and Goldman's don't operate by diktat. There'll be plenty of their traders taking contrarian or opposite views.
Cleverer people than us get it wrong and The Black Swan author Nicolas Taleb got it wrong in Anti Fragile when he suggested that being a taxi-driver was the safest job in economic turmoil. He hadn't allowed for Covid which is definitely a "black swan".
On the home front I like what Tullow and Harbour are doing whilst I assume Spirit are still for sale. We are the pick of the bunch imo but as always its personal and subjective.

"Trust the Squid or watch OPEC?" -well obviously OPEC but I see little to be gained by mocking Goldman's when they get it right and back their judgement by putting their money where their mouth is. I'm trying to copy them but they're much better at it than me. Currently Saudi Arabia and Goldman's are in harmony it seems. Dunno about Russia and some of the vassal states. The message coming out of the US shale is also that business ain't as usual. The 70% cash flow spent on capex is now from a bygone era. Supply is restricted and that is a fact. Demand is relatively inelastic and will grow even with a higher price. L7 you're turning into a jock! They can both be right.

“It has never been hard to tell the difference between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.” P.G. Wodehouse

Hi Modestus - I like what you're finding. Goldman's have stuck to their guns on oil forecasting and I suggest they'll have impressive earnings in that sector. They even have a go to name and he has been consistent in his forecasting, Jeff Currie. People continue to misread signals. Sure India is in trouble but markets don't have empathy. The media are all over it but the smart money is looking a month ahead at least. India is always eyeing China and they won't allow the economic gap to widen if they can help it.
I'd imagine the Goldman trade was to go long of oil from Q2/3. Impossible to time exactly but they've got close enough imo. I dealt in FX for many years and droughts and gluts in liquidity were almost always misread by commentators. Throw in reporting requirements and daily revaluations meant most couldn't stray to far from the (current) consensus. Goldman's and the like give their traders much more flexibility and wider mandates.
EnQuest is too small for us to get that much attention but it does mean we have been able to get on with the day job. Tullow look like they've sorted out their financing and we might see some moves on our bonds. they're paying back their 15/04/22 $650mio so I'm using that as a kinda surrogate for our bonds. Done and dusted reset maturity around a year ahead so October 22; that's 18 months away. Of course they might be paid off but I hope the company ignores the noise and just does what's best for its shareholders.
Buy-backs are in fashion again (BP/Shell)

Be Lucky

Boris with his usual clarity hasn't explained whether the promised 5GW of hydrogen production capacity by 2030 is Blue or Green. I'm with him on this. I think Cyan is a very underrated colour. I'll tell you something else. The cost will never be released.

The top financial boss at Shell was speaking after it was revealed last month that UK ministers have been considering a ban on new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, similar to Denmark. source Energy Voice 29/4/21. I'm reading this as unlikely to happen but WTF are these "UK ministers"? They should be named and shamed.
If exploration is banned then another barrier to the incessant ESG lobbying and pressure, where economics and finance are considered irrelevant, they will advance. Capitulation isn't sensible or an option. Enough concessions have been made and we're still waiting for the economic success story of stored wind and hydrogen. It can be done but at what price? I worked out that each house in Levenmouth will soon be enjoying hydrogen fuel at a cost North of £190k - £830k per house{not clear but it looks as though they're starting with 300 homes and may go to1,300 with the added *potential and we know what that usually means] Now call me old-fashioned if you like but heating and cooking shouldn't cost more than the average price of a house in an area.
Of course the attraction is Government (taxpayer) handouts and of the base (there's more) Ofgem giving £18mioand the Scottish Govt £6.9 mio which is effectively a subsidy from a subsidy as we support the Scottish economy.
I take a glimmer of hope from this: https://www.ogauthority.co.uk/media/7206/xtf-030321-meeting-slides_for-publication.pdf
and fervently hope that the unnamed "ministers" are ineffectual nobodies and grown-ups are still involved.

This is pretty much unreadable and looks more like a student's dissertation:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/972520/north-sea-transition-deal_A_FINAL.pdf
Basically nothing with a $ or £ sign in front of it but this got closest. "For the majority of industrial sectors, CCUS is not yet a viable investment. The market currently does not provide a sufficiently robust price signal to make industrial carbon capture viable"
I like Danes but this is the country of Bang & Olufsen; not IKEA.

There is a rumor going around that I have found God. I think this is unlikely because I have enough difficulty finding my keys, and there is empirical evidence that they exist. -Terry Pratchett, novelist (28 Apr 1948-2015)

I remember it well. If things go according to plan this will be some company. It is a kinda "last man standing" scenario and we deserve a break. Maybe AB's attitude is that when we lose, he loses more than the other shareholders so what have they got to moan about. I'm not against being more like PMO (NOW) in the form of Harbour. Regarding the newer form of companies replacing the majors; are they adaptations or can any of them pretend it was intentional and management foresight? However we arrived at this place it does look promising for the future.

Disagree there hitman. Debt is your friend (but not too much). Explore out of equity develop out of debt. However, it is likely that the heavier capex is likely post 2023 so you'll get your wish. I also don't see anything wrong in rescheduling debt if terms are favourable. There are going to be a lot of investment opportunities in this space going forward. As long as they make room for dividend that will exert its own discipline!

I obviously don't have the insight that the Lundin guy has but these are my sentiments too. The ESG lobbyists have had a clear run and if you just concentrate on the North Sea there has been an exodus of the majors. They basically don't need the hassle and you reach a point where the neighbours from hell make you decide to leave. That creates a vacuum and the companies that fill it do not have the resources or governance that comes from responsible ownership. I read that Saudi Arabia is prepared to assist in the "transition" and that is akin to letting Rose West baby-sit for you. We've seen what happens when foreign companies get a stranglehold on UK assets and it isn't always pretty.
Renewables are still not ready to have the stabilisers and subsidies removed and the emergency replacement (gas) has the reputation of the devil's spawn and Boris doesn't help. The heat pumps replacing gas by the mid 30's is plain ludicrous.
Climate warming? we've just had the coldest April in 60 years!
$70 dollar oil forget it. $80 minimum. I'm with Lundin on this one.

The guy who invented Velcro has just died. RIP

Glad you're reading them Modestus and thanks. Not an area I wish to get into (running out of runway) but I've a feeling I've missed a trick with Canadian heavy oil. I'm trying to revive a contact who works in the industry but with the amounts involved the Canadians never stop looking for EOR with the gluey stuff. For sure it is more difficult but the solutions are there and technology moves on. I know you and E121 follow them so I'm assuming, no fear from you guys if the numbers work.

I wanted to clarify my Wed 08.31 post. We were talking about the Bentley field not Xcite. I have no idea how far back NH was referring but a fair stab would be c.2011/12, a decade ago. Xcite was always for sale imo. For whatever reason they chose Kraken and don't forget Jim Buckee was a heavy oil expert.
The world is a completely different place today with "transition" and "net zero" in every companies statements. Both Bressay and Bentley have standard deferred payments if the fields go into production. It is the other side that interests me. What if we said "no way José, you'll have to pay us to take them away?"
We know AB & the whole oil industry think many steps and years ahead. The narrative is subtly changing and the shale guys aren't receiving the backing in the US. There is an awareness of a supply undershoot. Strategic supplies are important to every country and we'll never know what goes on behind closed doors with OGA, the military and Govt energy representatives along with leaders from industry? My feeling is that you have to make contingency plans and there is a trade there! I'm suggesting that the country has covered some of the downside risk of the development of an important HO Hub in the NS.
We know what we're doing regards heavy oil and have in-house experience without buying expensive consultants and contractors who often say what you want to hear. EnQuest keep doing what it says on the tin with expertise in heavy oil. That is the right direction and smart money is doing the same (Neo,HBR/EIG).

*A bookstore is one of the only pieces of evidence we have that people are still thinking. -Jerry Seinfeld, comedian (b. 29 Apr 1954)

https://www.spe-aberdeen.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/THE-BENTLEY-FIELD-UKCS-BLCK-93B-WORKING-WITH-THE-RESERVOIR-AND-FLUID-PROPERTIES-TO-PROVIDE-A-COST-EFFECTIVE-DEVELOPMENT-%E2%80%93-BARNY-BRENNAN-XCITE-ENERGY.pdf

This is a fresher presentation and I know costs are unescalated but they winnowed costs down to $30/bbl for Life Cycle Development Cost. That is a long way from the economic numbers Steve Kew quoted recently, close to $90 ?

Bemused Barnet

Got me thinking. Add the oxygen find and you had a scenario where Bressay was unviable by the looks of it (they postponed the project in March 2016). Since then Shell have divested in the NS (18.375% Bressay) and Statoil remained lukewarm at best. On the positive side the field did interest 2 majors originally. Xcite wasn't considered a serious partner imo but if the symbiosis worked then Statoil could have picked it up for a song. Xcite were desperate for a partner. It leaves the impression that with a firmer oil price and a stronger partner the field may have got developed. Close but maybe not close enough. EnQuest will be able to sift all relevant documentation from around this time. I may be a bit stale regarding this so it is good that new investors are looking at Bressay/Bentley for the first time. All this was 5-7 years ago.
One thing for sure is the knowledge is mostly there and now owned by one company.

Hi Freddie - I am not privvy to that but it was a small price compared to what Xcite spent collecting the information. I did mention it to Neil McCulloch at the 2015 AGM and from my notes I wrote this "He said that Statoil haven’t yet managed to get their fields to their economic requirements (confused here because I thought Mariner was sanctioned but I may have misheard). The $15mio for data sold by Xcite to Statoil was pooh-pooed. I got the impression Statoil bought it cheap and for peanuts.

Hi Slift - re: your Tue 20.09

Nicely explained and adds to my knowledge. You seem to understand oil better than most. I throw in gobbets of info that may be irrelevant but also may stimulate debate or help towards missing pieces of info (we're always in the mushroom club).
I see oil companies using licenses as a form of landbanks that property companies build. Bressay/Brent certainly aren't green belt but that phase of the North Sea is at an end anyway imo. These are effectively brown field sites that are always more expensive to develop but there will be few if any NEW fields granted in the NS going forward. IMO the value of Bressay/Bentley can only increase as the amount of sites decrease. We cannot predict but I have a feeling in my water that the fields will be having the EnQuest tyre kickers already at work and we could see something within 5 years depending on our cash position and Kraken performance. A nice position to be in.

Thanks again for your robust opinions/views.

Hi Juan -dunno about red herring but at least it was new, news! I wonder how much of it was us picking up a potential bargain or OGA not wanting to see the abandonment of a field? As always it'll be a combination no doubt. Decisions taken today may not come into play for several years but for sure there is a cornucopia of data available for Bentley and Bressay. I mean, Statoil paid around $15mio for data from Bentley and Steve Kew said in his latest interview that the 2 fields share an aquifier.

A memory burp. I went to the 2015 EnQuest AGM to grill their directors about Xcite. I take money seriously and know that the disclosures by directors about their own companies are heavily caveated so you need to be creative. They are much more open and gossipy about rivals (I once got thrown out of an Xcite corporate event but not before I had purloined some "useful" documentation. It drove the Directors mad as it was fed gradually into the message board by another poster)
Anyway, for what its worth. I got talking to Nigel Hares [co-founder ENQ} at the AGM. When I mentioned Xcite he replied that "they had looked into it but decided to 'pass'." They obviously have a different view today. Things change!

Hi Slift- you said in your 26 April post
"I think $35 breakeven in the North Sea is silly, especially when it's heavy oil.
Maybe, there is a misunderstanding between breakeven and development?"
There certainly is for me. I'm a simple soul and I see it that b/e is what you need to come out flat and if development costs are above that then you have a hard sell. Xcite were always conflating figures and only had one colour glasses. That's why I mentioned that Steve Kew was happy to let Rupert Cole get away with MOU's and NDA's whilst saying very little at AGM's. He always looked embarrassed but took the fees anyway. My respect for him is non-existent. I'll come back on your other post. Glad to have you aboard. I'm trying to revive some old contacts. The oil from Bentley is not unknown and they sold 150,000barrels to BP from the (E)WT I believe (from memory). Some of the people I was in contact with at the time were very knowledgeable. A Canadian oil engineer which reassures me on flows [Jim Buckee said its not the API but the centipoises] and an ex-PWC partner though I believe a shaman is more useful when it comes to understanding and valuing oil than a CA.
Others had qualities similar to Therapist and could find almost any document on the internet. I wouldn't mind the TRACS RAR if its around somewhere? With you on MrC. A shame really because he knows stuff but having changed names at least once I cannot trust him. Same for certain other posters. They drive serious investors away with their drivel and should really be on facebook.

Be Lucky

You probably haven't noticed chilting but at the top of this page its reads "Enquest Share Chat". Another observation a casual observer might make is that the vast majority of posters are shareholders of Enquest. There are many more who follow Enquest but don't post. None of these criteria applies to you but as they say "its a free world". I would have zero interest in engaging with you away from this board and your insistence on furthering your "renewable crusade" assumes we are interested and possibly so ignorant we are isolated from all media. That is an assumption of yours which I believe is incorrect. I know more about renewables than you at the effective end. I am not an apostate; I prefer realist. Haunt this board as much as you like (I cannot stop you) but I would think if their is any room in the evangelistical spreading of your gospel you could restrict it to stocks you're actually involved in.
It has a name. It is called "good manners".
If that is a step to far I suggest a good dating app or joining a club or society.
I am permanently filtering you so it is pointless you addressing me again.