RE: Questions27 Mar 2025 09:53
Ah Bengot,
Where do I begin. Let’s answer each question individually:
“ Why has it taken almost 2 years of advanced tier 1 discussions and yet nothing has materialised”
Answer: the fact that EPP only IPO’d in December shows that this statement is totally inaccurate and misleading. The first mentions of Tier one partners was around this time last year and we know the sensitivity of such discussions with NDA’s etc. However, the foretold “FTSE 250 engineering partner” has already been announced as Wood Group and the other talks have progressed with the FTSE 100 company for gas production/storage offtake deals and project level debt financing. So progress has been made and I’m sure once the storage license is announced we will hear more of these partnerships.
“Why the constant delays on first gas and will they meet 2027 targets so we can move quickly onto hydrogen”
Answer: Constant delays? The schedule for first production of gas is set for H2 2027, with Gas storage to begin as early as 2028 as per this week’s briefing RNS and with Hydrogen and LDES soon after. The company started with a big project that through PreFEED with Wood has gotten bigger and better. A small delay for a bigger prize I think is well worth it.
“Is capex requirement now more than £72million”
Answer: No literature from the company has stated that the CAPEX amount will be more. However, the project level investment from the FTSE 100 co and the cornerstone green energy fund equity buy in at multiples of the current SP ensures we are not reliant on government funding. Which is nice!
“ bought into the idea that EPP was a green play now it is getting promoted as a gas play, a gas play that is 40% nitrogen, anyone working in the industry will know how expensive and complicated this makes the project”
Answer: The company and all shareholders are promoting it as a gas production/storage, hydrogen production/storage and LDES project. Only Gallmat is trying to highlight the value as simply a gas play and as I stated yesterday sadly it’s best not to do so as those who are unresearched will make the mistake you’re making and try to devalue the project.
As for nitrogen the nitrogen level isn’t 40% and it is commercially viable, for proof see Centrica and Spirit Energy’s profitable neighbouring fields in the Irish Sea with the same gas mix. Also Spirits South Morecambe gas terminal is equipped with nitrogen scrubbers for this very reason. It may not have been commercially appealing in 1993 when it was discovered but it’s highly profitable now with 460m therms of fully appraised gas (not inc nitrogen) 100% owned and with an NPV of over £100m alone… not including Knox and Lowry which will, if approved, take the gas content up to 1 billion therms
Nice try Bengot, but we are well researched here 😉
Sign In
Follow the stocks
