Re: Electric in the slow lane? Whats wrong with hydrogen? H2 powered Buses and HGV's are coming, indeed are already here. What sort of battery does a twenty ton truck need? Still plenty of time left for the ICE to burn our oil IMO . Check out ITM power (LSE), also Hydrogenics (Toronto SE) could be the future.
Re: Electric in the slow lane? Apart from the infrastructural problems of providing charging stations and the electricity etc, there are some other more technical difficulties:1. Currently the best Lithium metal based batteries still in development have a specific energy density of 500 Watt hours/ Kg. i.e. more than double the current Lithium ion batteries we can buy today. This compares with a specific energy density of 12,800 for petrol and 13,300 for diesel i.e.You will need over 25 times the weight of liquid fuel to provide the same amount of oomf (but all that extra weight will demand even more oomf).2. Rapid charging and discharging is problematic due to the need for cooling to eliminate waste heat i.e. more weight and Flomplication.
Re: Electric in the slow lane? Hi All,Lots of political posturing when it comes to electric cars. The politicians get lots of brownie points by making themselves appear to be paragons of virtue when it comes to promoting green issues. After they've made their speech they probably drive of in their gas guzzling four by fours to the airport and fly to the other side of the planet to make their next sanctimonious speech.I wonder where the electric comes from to charge the batteries of the electric cars? Oil and gas fires power stations or costly wind turbines that are subsidised by the long suffering tax payer. If electric cars do become more popular it's a well known fact that there will be major outages of electric simply because we don't have the power station capacity to generate sufficient electric to supply the electric vehicles.Batteries to power electric cars only have a limited life and to replace them on an average family car costs around £1,600. This is an adverse feature of electric cars that the green lobby tends to ignore.I recall that gas powered cars were a flavour of the month a while back but what happended to them?Also, what about the infra-structure to support the charging of car batteries?Thankfully gas and deisel are going to be with us for a long long time by which time the greens will have withered and died.Carliol
Re: Electric in the slow lane? Basically what most manufacturers intend to build are ICE cars with electric superchargers.
Re: Electric in the slow lane? Only read it once but found it interesting. It seems that the Government's claims to phase out ICE cars are not exactly what I thought they meant. Another fudge coming up.
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie Thanks guys for going to the trouble to spell it out for me. It is really reassuring to see such interest from experts in the field. We amateur investors are often driven by our hopes and feelings rather than by hard facts which are hard to come by anyway at the early stages of any exploration project. The SP is still remarkably depressed presumably because the news has leaked out rather than been headline news however I expect the SP will soon takeFloff
Electric in the slow lane? [link]
Listing of Convertible Bonds Hurricane Energy plc, the UK based oil and gas company focused on hydrocarbon resources in naturally fractured basement reservoirs, is pleased to announce the admission of its US$230,000,000 7.5% convertible bonds due 2022 (the "Convertible Bonds" to the Official List of The International Stock Exchange ("TISE".
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie It all adds up and probably the FO will depend on a successful EPS although not necessarily so. If we go back to the RNS we talked about the FFD being put forward for approval and how a Farmee would want some input in to that even if atm they are not fully signed up.I don't know how these things are worked but, if the Farmee didn't need that much convincing about FB, I can quite believe that HUR are pretty close to making a deal which might mean a Q1 2018 announcement when various committees etc. have had their say. These big oilies move very slowly. Q1 is only 4 months away. Nothing really when you're talking about a 20 plus year project.Good initiative Biffadog, well done.
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie bobsson,Glad you agree.$530M of institutional investors money raised in June also agrees with us, otherwise they are going to lose a lot of money in the not too distant future and those boys don't tend to take that type of gamble.Only time will tell and not all will agree but that's where my money is.GLA.
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie Biffadog I think you are calling this correctly. The farm-in partner buys into the concept (FB) from the start. If it is just a farm in to GLA the consideration would likely be some cash to HUR for historic costs incurred + share of costs for EPS going forward and cash for further appraisal of GLA. The additional cash would fund drilling at HUR`s other prospects with Tempest/Typhoon having to be drilled in 2018. I think the rig already contracted has slots for up to four drills for HUR if required.IMHO DYOR
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie Flossoffa,What I should have included in my explanation was that it is my firm belief that most potential FO partners buy into fractured basement working without the need for the EPS to prove it one way or another.After all, it is proven to work in plenty of other geographical regions and HUR have found particularly high quality FB.Don't forget the two Lancaster wells have been satisfactorily flow tested and this combined with a Productivity Index (PI) of 160 stb/d/ psi (and all the other data we are not privy to) provides a compelling case.I appreciate this is only my opinion and others may disagree and say a FO partner will require successful EPS before entering the fray.You pays your money......GLA.
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie Flossoffa,There is a perfectly plausible explanation for this scenario. Firstly, HUR have always favoured getting a FO partner. Rob Trice and Alistair Stobie have said this on countless occasions. AS stated that in the absence of a FO, HUR would go it alone on the EPS and in the end HUR were forced down this route. Luckily they managed to pull it off, otherwise we would have been stuffed (as opposed to diluted). However, due to the very tight timescales on the EPS project that HUR (in their wisdom) had committed themselves to, a FO partner was not ready in time or was driving too hard a deal. If it was the former, then going it alone was the only option.If it was the latter, HUR have put themselves in a superb bargaining position and must have judged the dilution worthwhile, to secure a better deal for the shareholders in the long run.If they secure an FO partner between now and Q1 2018, then with that will come funds in addition to the secured EPS funding enabling a new drilling campaign (take your pick where).This will also turbo charge the SP as everybody likes the blessing of a major on board.HUR were also adamant that the needed a partner for FFD and it would be preferable to have started this relationship at the EPS stage.I'd draw your attention to P6 of the most recent Corporate Presentation, which was produced way after the EPS financing, where "Potential Farm Out" and "Potential Appraisal Programme" are clear for all to see.The bottom line is HUR are fully funded to FOIL, with or without a FO partner. As I say, this is only my take on things but it supports Alistair Stobie's comments to Bloomberg last Thursday.GLA.
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie I am a bit confused by the news that `HUR were hopeful of securing a FO partner by Q1 2018.'I thought that having made the sacrifice needed to fund us to first oil meant that we would soon have the sort of very positive confirmation that would enable us to drive a harder bargain than we could hope to manage in Q1 2018 i.e. with an earlier FarmFlout
Re: Bloomberg/Stobie Hi Biffadog,Nice one.Many thanks for that.All the best.