Member Info for stokey12

Rooky In relation to your 15.42 post I have just come across my notes from the AGM and at that time PHE ere talking to 8 major recyclyers and what I have noted as 7 intermediate recyclers so it looks like some of the big recycling companoes are already in discussion in relation to using the DMG technology. I also noted that the Spanish company is described as similar to Peel. All we need now is to turn some of these discussions to agreements and PHE will have enugh work for most of this decade.

If the object of the acquisition of W2T is to have marketing controlled as with all other aspects by DR, the question arises can the objective be met by any other means than an acquisition that significantly increases the number of shares in issue. I would expect this issue to be covered by the shareholder circular but felt that it should be aired in case it was overlooked.
As I see it the objective can be met by simply terminating the current agreement with W2T under which they act as a development partner. There is the issue around Protos but as under the initial plan PHE was only going to receive license and engineering fees which they will still receive I am not sure that this is much of a problem.

Manabouttown has stated that if the acquisition is not approved then this will lead to administration. As Protos/Peel is not the only customer that PHE has I do not see this as a realistic possibility. Also, Peel is committed to the development at Protos which can still go ahead W2T will be a customer of but not the development partner.

I have just read this article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50873047 It raies the possibility that in the future some of the gas used will be blended with hydrogen. I believe that I discussed it with DR who did not rule out this type of use for the Hydrogen created. It would possibly mean a change in the balance between electricity and hydrogen generated.

I have checked his myself and assuming that the combined shareholding of the White Family and Associates does not exceed 70% then this would give them 28% of the combined company. This flags up a concern in that this holding is enough to block any special resolution. while I have no reason to believe that they would not act other than in the best interest of PHE it is important to note.

It would also mean that slightly over 50% of the shares in PHE will be owned either by clients of HL or the White Family and Associates

Sprogbarnes - In relation to your 17.27 post can you please provide a link to the rule you refer to or give a reference for it.

I have just checked the list of significant shareholders. If the figures are still current then if all the shareholders who have their shares with Hargreaves Lansdown were to vote against or abstain on the approval of the deal it may not be able to go through. The reason being that the total holdings by all HL clients is a shade over 25% so if a special resolution is required then it can be blocked by all the HL customers voting the same way.

Wolveshaveeyes - In relation to your 14.41 post I agree with you on predictions 1, 3 and 4. I think there ill be some kind of involvement from the groups in 5. In respect of 2 that wouls probably need another EGM so as a cost saver may be done with the AGM. 6 would depend on the price I can see it succeeding at about 25p which will probably make some on here very wealthy.

Happy New Year everyone. As we start a new year and a new decade what are your predictions for PHE in the coming year. My two are that we will have more than one commercially operational DMG unit running by the end of the year I am not going to predict where. Secondly that one major recycler will buy at least one DMG unit.

Manabouttown - I note that having lambasted the Board of PHE when challenged on the performance of the Board of W2T yu immediately backed down and said you may have been harsh on the PHE Board. Your criticism of the PHE Board seems to be based on their lack of marketing of the DMG units which is what I thought was what they engaged W2T for.

On the question of performance I would point out for your information that marketing while important is not the only aspect. You need to judge the entire performance which includes how the Board handles the company finances. I await to see what is proposed about the composition of the Board but would hope that the CFO and CEO from PHE keep their positions in the enlarged company.

AnneOwl - In relation to your 18.17 post taking your figure as accurate that is the gross CO2 emission you need to do the offsets I mentioned earlier for CO2 emissions from petrol and diesel which are avoided by using hydrogen fuel cell. Also there is the offset from the lower CO2 emissions from the method used to generate the electricty. At worse the two will balance each other out.

Wolveshaveeyes - I cannot vouch 100% for this but I believe Dr Davies email is camerondavies@powerhousegroup.co.uk. As this is a business not a personal email address I am more willing than otherwise would be the case.

Jabberba - In relation to your 15.25 post may I suggest that you copy in the Chairman Dr Davies into your thoughts.

Piltick - In relation to your 13.02 post we are both of the same view. My understanding of the process, and this can be verified by reading the planning statement submitted with the planning application, is that the plastic in the thermal chamber only has enough oxygen to convert to gas but not enough to cause combustion.

AnneOwl - In relation to your 12.08 post. Noone wanting a quick profit would invest on AIM. I suspect that most people invested in PHE are aware that some CO2 is produced. However they look at the net result. When you look at the academic research on the gassification process it is actually carbon negative so it saves more CO2 than it creates. I would also note this process deals with the issue of what to do with waste plastic in an environmentally friendly way that does not use up any additional natural resouces.

AnneOwl - In relation to your 09.50 post you need to balance out the amount of CO2 used in generating the hydrogen and the electricity with the amount of CO2 that is saved by not using fossil fuels to produce electricity and using hydrogen instead of petrol and diesel to run vehicles.

AnneOwl In relation to your post from yesterday the academic research from China if I recall correctly shows that using gassification is carbon negative overrall so a carbon capture scheme would seem a bit of overkill. You have to remember that as the gassification is done in a thermal chamber the plastic is not combusted this reduces the amount of CO2 created.

Masterblaster In relation to your 07.47 post you should read the PHE website at www.powerhouseenergy.net. Also if you read the planning statement from this site https://pa.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=PY18AUTELF400 you will get an overview of the DMG system that PHE are developing from page 13 onwards.

Piltick in relation to your 22.54 post regardless of my view of the competence of the Board I am not inclined to just accept that the Board is right. I can see merit in the deal however I am not going to agree to something without being personally convinced that it is the right decision. On the basis of the information I have read so far I am not convinced that the merits of the deal justify the kind of share swap that has been mooted. I will make a final decision after I have read the shareholder circular.

masterblater - Thanks for that. It would seem that it is not at the same stage as PHE. Also it produces a significant amount of CO2 emissions so I cannot see any environmental saving.

AneOwl - In relation to your 18.21 post I note that the Environmental Protection Team in their comments on the planning application did not say that the application should be refused due to the lack of any carbon capture and storage. I also do not recall them asking for a condition that and CO2 emissions are captured or stored. I take from that that they are content that the arrangements in relation to discharge of CO2 emissions are appropriate.