Member Info for ZYX098

StockCheque,

Why are you trying to deflect?

Because you have no answer to my post?

Centrica's focus is on redeveloping Rough.

To quote the second paragraph in the article that you linked to;

"A net zero scenario including large scale hydrogen storage - specifically, a redeveloped Rough gas storage facility - would reduce energy costs by an additional £1bn per year by 2050."

Or the last two paragraphs;

“We now have a blueprint for the role that hydrogen could play as a very big battery in a net zero energy system, providing electricity when the wind doesn’t blow, and the sun doesn’t shine. All we need now is the green light from regulators and the government to unlock £2bn of investment to transform our existing Rough storage facility to become the world’s biggest hydrogen storage facility and start building out the energy system of the future.”

Centrica has offered to invest £2bn in upgrading and redeveloping the Rough gas storage facility. The site is currently responsible for 50% of the UK’s gas storage but requires significant investment to enable it to store hydrogen. To unlock the £2bn investment in the facility, Centrica requires a cap and floor model for the asset, similar to the model used for other forms of long-duration energy storage. If the facility had been able to operate at maximum capacity over the peak of the energy crisis (a scenario unreachable without regulatory certainty) it would have saved UK consumers over £5bn."

Like you said earlier "Dimwits spout BS because they don't get it".....

StockCheque,

To quote you;

"Dimwits don't get it

Dimwits spout BS because they don't get it"

Well, you clearly don't get it, as UKOG haven't "grabbed the salt caverns" - they literally have no caverns.

Dimwits were promoting UKOG's Dorset projects for several months, even though it was pointed out several times that UKOG's own presentation showed that the salt in Dorset wasn't conducive to being leeched out - something that UKOG have tacitly acknowledged by going to Yorkshire.

Dimwits were promoting Dorset, even though there was demonstrably no Wind Farm power available to produce H2, no H2 pipeline to move the H2 and insufficient demand in the area to justify developing H2 storage.

Dimwits somehow think that UKOG will get Govt cash to develop a greenfield site, even though there are several Companies who already operate salt caverns in that area that can be converted to H2 storage.

Dimwits ignore the funding model for H2 storage, which means that there will be no cash upfront to develop H2 storage facilities - they won't be cash generative until the facilities are complete, filled with H2 and H2 sales can begin.

Dimwits ignore that to develop such a facility from scratch will cost over £1 Billion - funding for which UKOG have zero chance of getting.

Dimwits ignore that there are several plans (by reputable Companies) to convert depleted gas fields to H2 storage - plans which are at a much more advanced stage than trying to start from scratch with no money and no infrastructure.

Dimwits ignore that the last issue of confetti will only serve to keep the lights on until Feb/March next year.

Dimwits ignore that UKOG's only major source of revenue - Horse Hill - has been shut down.

Dimwits ignore that UKOG will need to issue c. 5 Billion shares to fund the P&A of BB and restore the site - a work program that is galloping rapidly towards them as WSCC don't want to get left holding the baby when UKOG fold.

Dimwits ignore that UKOG only have one plan - to rinse PI's for as long as they can to keep paying themselves their exorbitant salaries.

Didn't really expect anything else from the WAG - they've shown how dumb & hypocritical they are on many occasions in the past.

The logical conclusion to the moronic decision by The Supreme Court is that all UK Oil & Gas production is illegal.

So we should stop all production immediately and replace it with imports, because all the Countries we import from will take account of the CO2 Emissions in their Scope 3 cases, right?

Of course they don't.

The Norwegian Courts even threw out an injunction which was based on the UK Supreme Court decision.

With Mad Ed refusing to defend the Jackdaw and Rosebank Development approvals in Court, ultimately we will end up importing more from Countries with poorer HSE regulations, lose tens of thousands of jobs here, the UK balance of payments will take a kicking and it will result in increased CO2 emissions.

An absurd lose-lose for the UK and the environment.

StockCheque,

In reality what the report is essentially saying is that we must have much more (TWh) Long Duration Energy Storage (LDES) in place as soon as practicable, irrespective of what form it takes.

If we don't, then all Ed's plan will result in is us (the taxpayer) paying more in curtailment payments to the wind farms - which is exactly what the NESO report says we'll be doing, to the tune of an estimated £6 Billion - £8 Billion a year - and higher electricity prices - which is also what the NESO report says we'll be doing.

Ed says we can make money by exporting the excess electrical power (we are currently a Net Importer), but as the NESO Report points out (buried on Page 22 of Annex 4) exports will be highest during the periods of relatively lower prices - precisely because the same wind event will likely be experienced over most of Northern Europe at the same time.

This is why we already see the price dipping below zero at times (like last night) and if you are an Octopus Energy customer, yesterday you got free power from 7am to 9am.

https://grid.iamkate.com/

The Neso Report and it's Annexes are interesting reading - especially the bits where it points out the problems meeting the stated objectives.

But once you've read the report, you can only come to the conclusion that;

A) Ed actually hasn't read it, or;

B) He's read it, but doesn't understand it, or:

C) He's read it, understands it, but decided to ignore all the bits that point out how barking mad his plan is.

Batteries will be a ridiculously expensive form of LDES, pumped Hydro is the best by a long way - but takes years to build and we don't have much in the pipeline.

Other systems (like air compression or liquid metal) are interesting concepts, but yet to be shown to work at scale.

Using potential energy systems (i.e. using large weights, as pushed by Roger Harrabin...) is insanely expensive.

So that leaves Hydrogen - also not yet shown to work at scale. But it is the most promising and potentially the quickest to be able to be brought onstream.

Which rules out salt cavity storage, as it will take at least five years just to leach out each cavern, never mind get all the permissions in place, drill the Wells, get the infrastructure built and begin to charge the caverns.

So it'll be using depleted gas & oil fields (onshore and offshore) as the quickest way to get LDES using Hydrogen.

The other big advantage of using depleted reservoirs is they don't lose volume every time you drawdown the pressure by withdrawing contents.

Salt caverns do every time you do this, because the salt relaxes - it's why they lose capacity over time.

Except for UKOG - pay a fortune for a Board that would be outperformed by Monkeys....

Skwizz,

Your 5 kWh battery only cost £1,200?

Wow.

Mine was £3,950 for a 9.5 kWh battery a year ago.

Based on that year (19 x 0.43w panels, unshaded, South facing), I think you are being a little optimistic on your figures for cost saving.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy with the system, but I estimate the payback will be around 14 years.

Also bear in mind that the Battery and Inverter are only warranted for ten years, though should last longer.

Apologies in advance if I'm teaching you to suck eggs,

One thing I'd strongly recommend is getting the largest battery you can - I was recommended a 3kWh system, which didn't make much sense and getting the largest size available was the best thing I've done.

Theoretically my system was rated to 196kWh (24hrs production!), but in practise the most I've got is 55 kWh. Often in Winter it's been down to single figures, and instantaneously the most it's done is 75% of the rated generating capacity.

Bear in mind that cloudy days will have a severe impact on PV production - during the recent "Dunkelflaute" event, I was often down around 5% efficiency.

If you've not already done it, make sure the panels have micro-inverters. They are a little more expensive, but remote monitoring means you can instantly see if one isn't functioning.

Also, if one panel isn't working, or part of the roof is shaded, then the rest of the system will still work - not correct for the conventional system.

I use the Octopus Flux tariff for my electricity - judicious use of the battery means that have been a couple of months where I've imported much more power than exported, but still made a profit.

Penguins,

Don't forget that Centrica also have historical experience of operating salt cavity storage onshore.

The original Hornsea facility was started by British Gas in 1974 and became operational in 1979 also giving a good time-frame for how long it takes to leech out a cavern....

They added additional capacity in the 1980's (I did the Well planning for them..) and sold it to SSE in around 2002.

If only someone had said several months ago that the lithology of the salt layers in Dorset weren't conducive to leaching out caverns.

If only someone had said several weeks ago that they would need a placing.

Oh, wait....

So this'll keep the lights on until Feb/March next year.

And they'll still need a placing for at least £1 Million to fund the BB P&A and site restoration.

If they manage to get as small a discount as 25% on the current share price, that's another 5.33 Billion shares...

And we paid CCGT Power Stations c. £6 Billion in 2023 to be on standby for when renewables couldn't provide power.

In reality that's a renewables subsidy, but it's often called a "Fossil fuel" subsidy by some organisations and some in the media (cough...Guardian...cough).

Absurdly, some CCGT power stations are being used in the much less efficient OCGT mode, as that makes them quicker to start up when renewables output drops.

BTW, I'm quite frankly very surprised that the media haven't picked up on what "increase in ‘demand flexibility’ from 2.5 gigawatts today to at least 10.4 gigawatts." actually means in the NESO report.

Our current demand is 39 GW, so cutting that by 10 GW means that a lot of homes, offices and factories will find themselves without power.

https://grid.iamkate.com/

In other Countries, that's called "Rolling Blackouts" and those that can afford them buy Diesel Generators so they can still have power during those times.

So the result is that people that get hit the most are the poorest in society, while emissions from diesel use goes up....

Shows just how out of touch our Govt and the Supreme Court are, when both Norway and The Netherlands have recently ruled against the eco-warriors.

The original ruling against Shell in the Netherlands triggered their move to drop their dual Dutch - UK listing, consolidate their HQ in London and drop the "Royal Dutch" part of the name.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx240l9xq2yo

The Norwegian ruling essentially threw out the case for considering Scope 3 emissions and said it should be a matter for Govt, not the Courts.

https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/norway-court-rejects-environmental-injunction-against-oil-gas-fields-2024-10-14/

Of course, with Mad Ed in charge, the chances of Govt support are zero.

He should pay attention to Apache leaving, Harbour in talks to merge with a US Company and move their HQ there, and numerous other Companies openly saying they are moving investment funds elsewhere.

He should also really pay attention to Shell and BP coming under a lot of shareholder pressure to move their primary listing to the New York SE, as are Total.

BTW, the actual report itself is very careful in its wording, and makes clear that Clean Power targets will only be reached with:

A four-to-fivefold increase in ‘demand flexibility’ from 2.5 gigawatts today to at least 10.4 gigawatts.

That means millions of households co-operating when the government tells them to use less electricity at short notice.

Sustained rollout of offshore wind at over double the highest rate ever achieved in Great Britain.

Which means tripling offshore wind capacity.

As well as a doubling of onshore wind capacity.

A tripling of solar power capacity is required.

A four-fold increase in battery capacity.

A lifetime extension for at least one old nuclear power plant.

Wind power is known to falter in Britain (like for the last week...) – at which point blackout prevention systems come into place.

Relying on wind generation for half of all power in the UK and demand will have to be forced very low indeed…

Neso is also clear that “a dramatic acceleration in progress compared to anything achieved historically” is required and “failure in any single area – generation, flexibility, networks – will lead to failure overall; all parts need to deliver to achieve clean power.”

Success in any single area is very unlikely.....

And all a mere snip at £40 Billion a year.

Of course, Govt reports never underestimate the actual costs, do they?

Do they???

BTW, the current "Dunkelflaute" event (which happen pretty much every year, often more than once, occurs between October and March) has seen the UK utterly reliant on Gas fired power stations and imports for the last week;

https://grid.iamkate.com/

BTW, any idea why the UK CCC committee didn't take these events into account when forecasting wind power generation?

Because instead of taking an average of the number of windy days over a period of years (and we have decades of information), they chose to base their modelling on just one year.

Which happened to be the year with the smallest number of non-windy days on record.....

And where was that News on the BBC Website?

Front page?

No.

Business Section?

No.

It was buried in the Scottish section.

Also nowhere did it mention that this would mean the closure of THE flagship field of the UKCS, Forties.

Which will also mean the Forties pipeline closing a decade early, with the resultant loss of production from feed-in fields and leaving Billions of bbls in small fields stranded.

Shell, BP, Equinor, Total all diverting investment away from the UKCS.

ENI essentially leaving.

Harbour and Serica expanding their Overseas operations, but not in the UK.

Ithica unable to progress the development of Cambo, as they now don't have the finances to develop that and meet their share of Rosebank development costs.

Harbour making a half year loss, laying off 40% of their ABZ workforce and in merger talks with a US Company that would see them move their HQ to the US.

Smaller UK based Companies such as Deltic & Parkmead unable to progress exploration or developments, because UK Banks won't provide finance to fossil fuel industry projects any more.

Industry studies show the continuation of the EPL (more than 2 years after all "windfall profits" stopped) will result in Tax Revenues being nett NEGATIVE by 2030/1, as so many decommissioning programs will be brought forwards - for which Companies will start calling on the tax rebates that they are due.

All of which was carefully explained (in small words and short sentences) to Rachel Reeves and Ed Miliband by many Economists, Organisations (including the Unions) and Companies before the budget.

But did they listen?

Of course not.

They'd rather listen to the few shouty voices of the eco-warriors on Twitter/X, who won't be happy until we are back to living in caves.

Of course, Ed Miliband is busy promoting the 'independent' report by NESO (Headed by Ed Miliband, Report commissioned by Ed Miliband) that we could reach Net Zero by 2030.

Except it actually shows that we stand zero chance of doing so, especially since the large electrical transformers needed in their droves are currently on a FOUR year lead time to order.

And even if we reach Net Zero, HM Govt own modelling says we'll still need fossil fuel for around 25% of our electrical power.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/modelling-2050-electricity-system-analysis

Hopefully reality will kick in sooner rather than later, but I doubt it.

So the end result will be that we will be even more reliant on O&G imports (from Countries with poorer HSE regulations), which will increase our CO2 emissions, cost tens of thousands of skilled jobs, devastate the UK Balance of payments and lead to brown outs (as the current dunkelflaute shows).

And will your home energy costs come down?

No, they'll continue to rise.

Why?

Because "cheap" renewable energy...isn't.....

Madit,

You really are way, way off in fantasy land, aren't you?

There will be no "announcement on Govt revenue support before year end" for UKOG or anyone else involved in Hydrogen storage projects.

As usual, you are just making stuff up.

Even making up a story about what Skwizz said, when his post is immediately below yours and we can all see that what you claim he said - he didn't actually say.

Just like you were claiming that "a little bird" you told HH was producing more than was being reported.

Like the multiple 1 "signals" than an RNS was imminent (still waiting almost 2 months after your first pronouncement).

Like the 11111 "signal" that an RNS that was imminent with news that was going to send this share price rocketing (that was about a month ago).

It must be really annoying for you that there are people on this board who can remember your fantasy predictions and point out when they fail - and you have a near 100% record of failure.

It must be really, really, really annoying for you that - on the odd occasion that you try and post something technical - there are posters on this board that actually work in the Oil field, and we can use our knowledge, experience and training to point out the giant holes in your stories.

BTW, with over 10 Billion shares in circulation, a share price of 1p would value UKOG at £100 Million, which oddly enough is the amount that UKOG have raised for their current production of c. 10 BOPD.

Presuming they continue not to RNS the fact that their major source of revenue (HH) has been shut in, the most likely announcement that will affect UKOG's share price is their RNS of the placing they'll need to fund the P&A and site restoration of BB.

Since that will be for at least 4 Billion shares, it'll be a steep fall.

Of course, it's easily achievable!

We only need to:

- contract as much offshore wind capacity in the next two years as the last 6 combined; and

- build (on time) as much transmission capacity in the next 5 years as has been built in the last 10 years; and

- make fully dispatchable clean power work - including hydrogen to wire; and

- get £40 billion per annum invested

In reality the conclusion that this can be done is a wonderful bit of civil service double speak.

My question is are they just doing what they've been instructed do do, or have the Civil Servants at NESO bought into this fantasy hook, line and sinker as well?

Jim Ratcliffe’s pre-election quote on the viability of this is far more accurate, when he said: “That’s absurd”

In the meantime, we have a weather "dunkenflaute" (most ocmmon time for them to happen? Between October and March...) hanging over the UK and most of Europe, which means that Wind and PV production are way down and will remain so for several more days;

https://grid.iamkate.com/

Yesterday, Gas provided 61.7% of electrical demand, while Wind and PV provided just 6.4%.

The insane concept that is biomass provided 8% (for which we pay Drax a subsidy of c. £2 Million per day).

Pumped storage will be zero soon enough and I imagine we'll see the spot prices of Gas and LNG rising significantly.

And temperatures are at their norms for this time of year.

Hate to think what will happen when it gets colder....

Not stealing 40% of someone's Private Pension by wrapping it into IHT would be a good start.....

It seems that Rachel Thieves is going to treat the Pension Industry the same way that Gordon Brown did in his 1997 budget - screw most Pensioners but do it in a way that they won't realise for several years, unless they've been paying close attention.

She'll be desperate by the time she gives this speech, as the OBR (and the market reaction) have shown what we all knew when Labour started floating the rumours of what would be in the budget - it's a budget that will do nothing for growth but instead will hamstring British Business, while massively increasing the debt.

Told my Sisters kids how much less that means that they stand to inherit from me, and what increasing the debt will mean for their taxes over the next Decade.

They'll not Vote Labour again.

Ever.

StockCheque,

Good that you appear to know what GB Energy will do, because nobody else really does.

It's beginning to sound more and more like BNOC, which was set up by Labour to 'help' develop the UKCS. It became a byword for cronyism, corruption and a bloated work force, run by Politicians and Unions who had no clue what they were doing.

It got so bad it had to be morphed into BritOil and was eventually put out of it's misery when the Govt essentially strong-armed BP into buying it.

Although GBEnergy will have it's HQ in ABZ, judging by the offices they have rented, there won't be many people there...

Mind you, Jurgen Maier has already said he won't actually be based in ABZ - he'll be in Salford.

Hopefully GB Energy will do better than Ørsted, as their ROCE for renewable energy is -14.5% (yes, MINUS) and last year they lost over £1Billion....

Anyway, Salt Cavity storage isn't an "emerging technology" - I planned the drilling programs for two Salt Cavity storage Wells at Hornsea in the mid 1980's, and there were several already on location.....

StockCheque,

Why have you filtered Cyan2?

Everything he wrote is correct.

Or, like other Rampers, do you hate reading posts which point out the flaws in your claims?

UKOG's recent placings have been - in reality - just to keep the lights on.

That cash is rapidly running out, and with HH currently shut in, their cash burn rate is even higher.

They also have the commitment to P&A BB-1 and restore the site galloping up to smack them in the face in the next few months.

Even their own (very outdated) estimate says that it's going to be £1.1 Million to do, and that's cash that they simply don't have - so a placing will be needed to fund it.

If they don't get HH production restarted, they'll need around £3.5 Million to P&A the two Wells and restore the site.

Nobody is going to provide £1+ Billion in financing to a Company with a market cap of less than £4 Million, that's been a serial failure and doesn't even meet the criteria required to submit an application for Round 1.

I know that this is all information you don't want to hear, so I've little doubt that you'll filter me too...

So 2 Wells to be P&A'd, surface equipment to be decommissioned, cleaned and removed and the site restored back to it's original state.

In round figures, I'd work on £1 Million per Well, £300k for the surface equipment and £1 Million for site restoration.

Don't know how much for the three monitoring Wells they drilled to monitor the surface aquifer for the conversion of HH-2 to water injection (another thing long promised, but never happened.) - but, say, £50k each.

So in the region of £3.5 Million.

In the meantime, they've the ongoing daily operating / maintenance costs and they'd better hope it doesn't rain much, as that has to be tankered away for disposal.

ScarletVixen,

Not an engineer, are you?

They've got something to work on a lab scale basis, by using filtered seawater.

Great.

But that's a very, very long way from being able to scale up to large volume commercial use with unfiltered Seawater - presuming it can be scaled up.

The nuances of this statement also clearly went over your head;

"is not as efficient when compared with pure water electrolysis because of electrode side reactions, and corrosion arising from the complexities of using seawater."

Many, many years of work still required before we can hope to see a commercial system.