Active Energy Share Discussion Threads

[juleshoddy] 05/7/2016 09:16

AGM on 21st so here's hoping eh?

[callmebwana] 04/7/2016 21:43

Well, there seems to be no news except Warrants converted, etc.
This share has come to a stand still, downwards!!! Surely there must be some news they can give us?? Canada,bio mass fuel conversion?? This share had so much going for it !! What has happend??? Richard, wake up !!!
"Ah" well ! no news= good news.So I have answered my own question !!ATB.

[jakes114] 15/6/2016 11:29

A good upbeat statement all we need is the deals to come through and this will fly, well under the radar at the moment

[footrot355] 01/6/2016 18:23

could really do with some news, this company has so much potential it is a shame to see the share price mouldering down here.

[simon templar qc] 01/4/2016 19:06

hope you don't blame me guys, I was only giving my views. The recent trading statement appears to have done more damage however and I didn't comment on that.

[simon templar qc] 15/3/2016 14:28

pdpons,

There are a whole load of different chemicals that wood pellets burn into the atmosphere and the argument will go on.

Furthermore the government is intent on reducing emissions...




A better bet would be APC who's business model is completely different and is providing the solutions to reduce the energy.

edit:

By the way carbon neutral would be power generation by water as in waves or dams also windfarms and solar power.

[pdpoms] 15/3/2016 13:35

From the report issued earlier this month - says that the carbon content within the ash in coalswitch is significantly reduced in staged conditions - not sure if this is the same as Co2 'emissions'...

"-- CoalSwitch fuel burned more efficiently than coal, and produced far less ash.

The ash content in CoalSwitch was 1.69%, compared to 9.42% for the pure coal; and whilst the carbon content within that ash was similar between the two fuels in 'unstaged' conditions (when all the oxygen was introduced at the same time as the fuel), there was a 40-55% reduction from the CoalSwitch/coal blend in 'staged' conditions (typically used in industrial power plant furnaces to control NO(x) emissions)."

[battlebus2] 15/3/2016 13:10

Bit of a run on these now, i'm scratching my head on these now....

[garth] 15/3/2016 07:40

Yes, but not only the carbon effects Simon - sustainability and other pollutants too. The carbon footprint is the biggest deal though at present.

G.

[simon templar qc] 14/3/2016 16:59

garth, on the one hand is the efficiency of both coal and wood on the other is the carbon effects. There is pressure to reduce the carbon footprint and that is where the problem lies.

Mr marker not taken much notice today the argument will probably go on.

[garth] 14/3/2016 16:48

Two different issues being dealt with here.

1. Does burning wood have higher or lower CO2 output than burning coal?
The Drax article is dealing with the carbon neutral status of the wood pellets. It suggests that the US market has been misled. It touches on the issue of sustainability too. Coal is clearly not sustainable, while wood (if managed correctly) clearly is.

"The report says Enviva has claimed that 'burning wood in power plants reduces carbon emissions compared to coal'. But the study says Drax's own data shows that while burning coal leads to emissions of 1,901lb of carbon dioxide per megawatt hour (Mwh), the figure for wood is significantly higher – 2,128lb per Mwh.

Enviva's claim is only possible because of a UK and EU 'policy loophole' – which does not apply in America – classing biomass fuel such as wood pellets as 'zero carbon'.

According to the study, Enviva has not made this clear. Its claim to the SEC that using its pellets 'reduces' emissions only applies to making and shipping the pellets, not burning them."

2. Does AEG Coalswitch, when compared with other feedstock, remove obstacles to switching away from coal?
The AEG RNS is dealing with efficiency of burning, heat output, sulphur dioxide pollution, etc. The results mean that coal-fired power stations would not need to make costly conversions to burn pellets and that pellets perform well when compared to coal.

Coal-fired power stations would switch for regulatory and environmental issues. I guess the issue of concern for Simon T would be whether a change in the Co2 classification for wood could kill the industry altogether. Changing for sustainability or lower SO2 emissions might not be enough on its own if it wasn't also being driven by the attraction of lower CO2?

G.

[battlebus2] 14/3/2016 07:16

Surely you are missing the point Simon.

[simon templar qc] 14/3/2016 01:15

I don't do along with the "change supplier" argument, what really matters is whether wood chips are carbon neutral or not and according to the US regulator they are not!

Now this could have ramifications for all wood chip suppliers to wood chip burning.

Is it a coincidence the share price fell on Friday before the report was published?

What is there to bet the price will fall today. I bet better than evens.

If you read the report carefully what is suggested is its bad news for Drax. I cannot see changing a wood supplier will make any difference at all. What the report in the Mail suggests to me is the conversion to wood chips could blow up big time as wood chips are no longer carbon neutral!

Was following the company the last few months but I will not invest now, the risk has increased.

[battlebus2] 13/3/2016 20:19

Thank you cottoner.

[cottoner] 13/3/2016 20:00

RS twitter

[battlebus2] 13/3/2016 19:11

Cottoned what is Richards Twitter handle, seem to have lost it..

[simon templar qc] 13/3/2016 17:53

What is there to bet its negative. The market will decide tomorrow. The US very strict on claims we have seen the damage they have done to the car industry and emissions!

[cottoner] 13/3/2016 17:10

This is a further positive for for AEG CoalSwitch.

RS tweet today.

U.S. watchdog to probe shock claims on power giant Drax's 'green' supplier; CoalSwitch the sustainable alternative!

[simon templar qc] 13/3/2016 17:08

Shock report on wood pellets emits more carbon than coal...

[battlebus2] 08/3/2016 13:36

Many thanks cottoner, plenty of upside to come.

[cottoner] 08/3/2016 13:33

Our view:
The news is POSITIVE for the company. The results of the test burn in the university of Utah confirm and augment earlier findings that AEG’s CoalSwitch fuel is commercially viable and can be co-fired with coal in power plants to achieve a significant reduction in emissions. Furthermore, this brings the company one step closer to realizing its plans of building a first biomass fuel plant in Alberta, which will introduce synergy effects, as the low-value pulpwood produced from Aspen/Poplar could be processed to produce the biomass fuel and sold at a much higher margin, compared to the low margin
timber sold to paper mills.

For the time being, we reiterate our target price of USD 0.234 (GBp 16.44) for AEG’s shares, but note that the company’s future announcement of finalizing the deal and starting the forestry operations in Canada, or securing the funding for the construction of the biomass plant could trigger a review of our target price and increase the upside potential of the stock.

[battlebus2] 07/3/2016 22:04

Hi RP, I haven't seen any as yet.
Interview with Richard Spinks on proactive investors today after the news. Next step is contracts and funding.

[rp19] 07/3/2016 21:43

Evening, new to the thread. I am assuming that the nature of the business (big, lumpy contracts) means that there are no broker forecasts out there?

[garth] 07/3/2016 14:27

Having been invested here now for several years I have continued to hold and add a few as we consolidated through the last 12 months. I fully believe that this will be £100m rated business before very long. But DYOR and no advice intended.

G.