GreenRoc Accelerates their World Class Project to Production as Early as 2028. Watch the full video here.
sy
That is because the UK has massive potential for additional offshore wind capacity BUT is has close to bugger all UK manufactured elements of the turbines hanece they are desperate to try and get some UK jobs created.
Problem with UK wind power is that it is predominantly overseas owned operators and manufacturers. Hence teh income, job creation and profits are almost all overseas. Saudi of green windpower UK is NOT and govt would love to get what ever crumbs are available.
Essentially to little too late - serious work needed to be done 20 years ago. Let us hope they do not make the same mistake with hydrogen. BUt we are talking about government decision making processes here........
I believe so Haggis. It is a good read and sets out a pretty compelling case.
The expert managers in the larger funds will read past the '1300% so far' stuff and make financially robust decisions based on where these ,no longer 'penny' , stocks are and are going to.
Barclays reiterates overweight with a target price of 4,340p.
Seaangler Agree very interesting.
I read someone on one of hese boards last week describe them as 'dinosaurs'.
Could not be more wrong. These companies emply loads of very very bright people, have access to near endless cash and are deeply rooted in both :
- highly complex engineering that has pushed huge innovation and technical problem solving eg deep water off shore oil
production
- successfully delivering giga-scale £ projects
What they will achieve in green energy (now that they are paying it some real attention) will be stunning to watch.
This is a great example of why the major powers in the world are now switched on to green energy and climate change.
The hard economic costs for states in Asia - particularly China - are catastrophic as their seaboards are the most densely populated. While we have all been aware of tiny island atolls becoming awash with rising sea levels this is where the sh*t really hits the fan.
The real ‘bubble’ in green energy markets is from sinking cities. A short term thing? I do not think so.
It is a normal process as AFC grows in scale it moves out of the target scope for some (often smaller) funds - hence sold
and into the target scope for other (often larger) funds - hence bought
Many larger funds tend to hold for longer hence the share price is subject to less volatility
Toneman
Agreed on the use of 'wasted' electricity. These are contracts that would require both parties to agree to change - so how to so that?
A Shell led consortium could provide a technically and economically credible solution that did not exist at the time the contracts were agreed. This 'excitiing now nnovation' provides UK goverment an exceptional opportunity to embarrass the power companies into agreeing the required change using lines including:
- an exciting new technology in green energy - British led, our wonderful engineeers matching our wonderful vacinne scientists
- as we now have a way to avoid the waste we should immediatley act on that and would be irresponsible not to
- UK families, consumers and taxpayers are paying for this waste out of their hard earned wages . COVID has had a massive negative impact on so we should take up any and every opportinty to help our people
- in the year of the UK hosting teh Glasgow climate conference - more heads of state visiting UK than ever before. UK leads the world in how renewable energy performance can be enhanced - and copied across the world
- the products to deliver the service are UK built and will create new jubs in advanced manufaturing technology at the heart of the green revolution.
- many of those jobs are in the north of England evidencing real 'levelling up' in action in traditiona manufacturing towns like Sheffield
- Government stepping in and being seen to help all the commercial players make this new improvement happen
- Goverenment also announcing that all contracts in negotiation / future contracts will have the 'Shell solution' mandated as part of permission to build being granted
- which political party would oppose this - none - so uniform cross party political support
Can you see the current operators press officers trying to talk their way round that . I dont think so - they would not dare. The press would crucify them. Not worth the reputationa toxicity. Game over.
Doli Have look at this. Good explanation and comparison.
https://youtu.be/f7MzFfuNOtY
SatellitePro
An interesting article.
When you read about the rapidly accelerating introduction of battery-based renewable energy there seems to be an underlying assumption that becasue renweable energy to recharge teh batteries is 'close to infintie' - and it is - that teh scope for battery use is the same.
The lithium article makes clear that there are limiting factors - much as with rare earth minerals. Perhaps next generation (non-lithium) batteries will skip over that hurle. Perhaps they will not or perhaps the unit cost will be steps higher. Perhaps that will make hydrogen appear a more economic solution for a wider range of high volume applications eg heavy commercial vehicles.
I dont presume answers but i suspect the path to green will have all manner of twists and turns - especially as China seeks a world leading role and has its hand on many of the limiting factors in key minerals.
Going to be very interesting ,and demanding. A good place to eb for for very innovative and driven companies.
I have a mate who has worked on olympic and commenewalth games delievry teams. All that sort of stuff is organised years, literally years, in advance of the event. Nothing in terms of engineering design and procurement is done 'last minute' or even just in time.
Companies like Agrekko are big players in this space and in major event s(eg big exhibitons). They put the who poer supply package togather. I guess they might become a customer as demand for green power increases.
No argument with importing as long as we maximise the potential of domestic (UK offshore) production. One of the valid arguments for nuclear power is strategic national interest eg what happens in time of war/ crisis etc. You are probably old enough to remember the oil crisis in the 1970s... UK power supply was essentially ok because of domestic coal. Not so great during the miners strike and associated three day week.
Changed days of course but there are some risks that a nation state must avoid and brown/ black outs is high on that list. The emerging offshore wind technology gives the UK the opportunity of long term and secure energy self sufficiency if the ‘joining it all up’ thinking and delivery is made to happen.
It is desirable, it is no longer impossible....so it is doable. Just needs a load of our best engineering and associated cash to make it happen.
Hi Taverham,
Just thinking out loud on this bur taking into account the development of deep water ( nit drilled into the seabed) wind turbines where direct hydrogen production(as in oyster) is what they are designed to do. less transmission of electricity that our grid is nit up to anyway. I live in Scotland and am increasingly ****ed off that large scale offshore wind farms are being permitted and built (which is good) but transmission constraints coerce them to be switched off and the power companies paid anyway. A figure quoted in a newspaper here last week talked of hundreds of £m per annum. And that does nit include the VERY big projects that are already planned for construction which will add to the grid loading.
It seems that we do not have a fully coherent and joined up strategy across the country. 5- 10 years ago hydrogen was not a credible player in joining things up in an economic and technically robust basis. It looks like it is now. My question/train of thought is what could be achieved with a very rapid acceleration of the role of hydrogen in optimising a national energy strategy successfully and at the same time displacing the very expensive nuclear plant needed.
I look at how long nuclear plant planning and delivery takes....maybe close to 15-20 years from concept to producing power? How far and how fast has hydrogen moved in that same time scale?
I think it is a bit like pre WW2 battleships were the critical naval force. In less than 3 years (say 1942) aircraft carriers turned that completely on its head junking 250 years of established naval doctrine.
Small changes can make big difference (and sometime bloody quickly ).
read in the Times this morning that Hinckley is to cost an additional £500m, taking total (forecast cost) to £23 billion.
Now I get the limited sunshine and variable wind arguments for nuclear base load.....but......the scope for large scale hydrogen use as load balancing on a national basis seems to becoming an ever more credible position. And of course, turbines, solar panels and electrolysers can be junked and recycled relatively easily in contrast to the gigaexpense of handling nuclear waste and clean up.
I wonder how quickly a ‘moonshot’ hydrogen programme in the UK could displace the need for the proposed nuclear stations that Japan/french/Chinese companies are struggling with to build in the UK.. Ten years ago, maybe even five, this would be an unattainable green fantasy.
Today.....what could be achieved with a £12bn (half a nuc station)..
makes you wonder.