Member Info for WG818

HITS
The latest incarnations are getting a bit hot under the collar aren’t they?!?!
Just for a bit of fun this is what was posted by myself “a realist” not a tree huger , deeramper, paid local activist, Vladimirs mouth peace, or berenbe** shorter.

WG818

Posted in: ANGS

Posts: 636

Price: 0.65

No Opinion
RE: Investor Questions answered31 Dec 2021 09:56

Hold on to your hats regarding the EA/CC and the noise issue. A previous PP had a 37db limit embossed. The recent Aecom report looks to be on and above that limit and doesn’t include the noise generated from existing site that it says has complaints against it.

Now I very much doubt the lady from the EA reads this BB but she seems to share the same opinion in her letter this week. Amazing what a little bit of research can do.

Yearly accounts should be published next week and sound will have to say one way or another what’s happening by next Friday.

Perhaps any new mug punters should take more notice of those with years of experience here than the rampathon going on…….that generally means one thing, and they did vote to be able to issue those 870 million new shares in the “E” GM called for that very reason before the AGM at end of March!

Actually Taverham they were only doing the pipe rack foundations. They still don’t have permission for a large part of the plant foundations. I can only assume they pulled the storage tanks and the new massive flare base and are waiting for the new permission to lay the concrete base.

The bit in the same RNS that says some essential equipment won’t be on site in Q1 Gedions.
Not a hope in hell it being Q1 and will be lucky to be Q2 IMHO.

HITS much as I hate to disagree with you it’s not only about the flare. It’s very much about the noise levels as confirmed by both the consultation responses from East Lindy council and the EA. One recommendation of further in house council consultation and the EA confirmation that they have asked Angus for further information regarding this as we already know.
I believe there is already a noise limit imposed on the original site and the Aecom documents regarding sound limits are nowhere near as comprehensive as those submitted by Wingas the predecessor.

The new flare is not the one that the council or the EA were given previous information on and is now 12metres square (the stories tall) and will also need looking at as confirmed by the officer asking for the RAL colour.
Lastly the scale of the development has increased 3 fold and hardly constitutes a slight variation.

I think the planning officer will very much have the (planning by stealth) statement in her mind which East Lidsey pointed to on the other application she is dealing with also submitted via Aecom.

Gideons as usual you are talking carp as regards to your flare size theory!

Hits
Yes a just demonstrated by his last post. They would have been put there by law apparently! Despite the company posting them as welfare facilities (posted today) and the works having started( very slowly however) before Christmas.

Three months construction and fabrication at very best , In all likelihood well into H2 imho.

Donk
I noticed you couldn’t provide a single document to counter my statement! So You must concede that possibly the “ resident technical experts” may be correct……and not for the first time!

Given the Angus 100% record of being wrong on everything they publish (I challenge you to show me a single correct one) many wont give the following statement much credibility Donk.

“A.The lenders technical advisers and Angus evaluated the deliverability of the existing two wells as being likely to be greater than 5 mmscfd.”

You believe do you?
Well they could have been paid £12.8 million to take it off the Russian Federations hands only a couple of years ago!
They obviously weren’t interested in being given multiple millions for this wonderful storage facility so why would they possibly pay a penny Now?

PS the pipeline to make that possible had a price tag of over £200million 10 years ago.

“The biders are bonifid.“
Biders? We are in week 7 of the for sale sign going up. I haven’t seen any bids since then!
Even Sound have gone quiet!
Having a look in the Data room is a little different to bidding isn’t it?

Gideons
The CC give a 13 week figure as guidance for determining an application. This could still be passed over to the committee to decide even at this stage as the sidetrack was.
Just for balance the previous decision regarding these works took 10 or 11 weeks to be granted from memory.
This isn’t of course a minor layout change as portrayed as the scale has increased 3 fold.

I believe the offer needs to prepare a report what ever happens.

Give the green agenda thing a miss moving forward by the way. No one on here has one. In fact not one objection is showing on the PO portal against it!

Gideons
As it says they are for the foundation for the pipe rack which was meant to be done in early January.
The other picture is of the very “Third word welding tent”again a month behind.

As opposed to that of Angus who have never hit a schedule regarding anything except once at Balcombe (went wrong in the end though) by Years in Brockham and Saltfleetby cases?

Makes you wonder how many multiple accounts holders are posting here when a post hat says
“Stopping producing and stopping production are two different things”

It’s exactly the same thing!

Gideon.
Your just embarrassing yourself now.
The National grid section was carried out by their own contractors and was indeed done on time back in 2020.
The section Angus were and still are responsible for constructing was started on October the 8th 2020 and as far as anyone is aware still hasn’t been finally complete red with the golden weld.
Twitter pictures showed them working on the last 150 metre 10ish section (not hydrogen ready last month (14 months late) and since then we have seen pigging works.
At the other end of the 8 mile pipeline the have yet to install approx 6 KM of pipeline to connect the new equipment together.

PS 300 metres of Only 4inch pipe in a pipeline that long is hardly worth mentioning. It’s probably just standard speck now!

Who was the numpty who said the Brockham PP was Not objected to by the planning officer?
Total cobblers! In fact it’s been sent to the committee without a date showing yet!

SCC ref 2021/0165

So why exactly would She’ll be interested again?

1st it was for a clapped out depleted field that Even GL has said any Major army/wont be interested in.

Then it’s for the Gas storage that Gazprom didn’t end up doing and gave the company away 2 years and left the de-com costs. fair to say She’ll may had had it back then if that’s the case!

Or lastly for Hydrogen storage thats just pie in the sky fantasy land.

Yet another LOL moment from our “new” contributor! And how exactly are they going to generate enough to store? Let alone supply the demand that’s already there? Your taking decades away!
Are you sure they can even store it at Saltfleetby if it was possible?

This is an end of life field60/70 depleted. No major is or was interested as GL makes it clear in an interview available from the media section here.
The storage side of things was deemed to be unviable by Gazprom the ultimate previous owner as the new pipeline was going to cost £200 million.
Talk of Hydrogen storage is also nonsense as they simply can’t produce it on that sort of scale to store it. That’s if they even could or would be allowed to do so!

As does page 33 HITS. Looks like the same plans they show on twitter don’t they. Dated 1st October.
Why the 3 month delay for the revised PP ?

It’s listed in the CPR available on the Angus websiteDanno.