Hurricane Energy Share Discussion Threads

[jimarilo] 11/1/2020 13:14

Having burnt off cuts, I know insulated boards burn easier than fire lighters and produce a black toxic smoke. It is the same material as spray foam from a tin to fill gaps

More and more homes are ram packed with the stuff and particularly timber frame homes which are quick and cheap to build, but have a very reduced life span

A certain tower block was clad with the same material

Having your sole air supply through a heat exchanger would be easy to introduce toxic fumes if tampered with or a failure

No vents in your windows, then why bother having windows you can open ? and why not have a pressure chamber at your front and back door to get in and out, absolute madness

Disposing of isolation boards is not the easiest problem to solve either and is a health hazzard to use, if you have ever cut 40 sheets of this stuff you will know what I mean

[sirrux] 11/1/2020 08:36

Dean, and they are one of the only ones I know who have a track record of doing what they say will do. That's rare, no wonder the market's suspicious!

[sirrux] 11/1/2020 08:16

If the human population reduced by 80%, would the 20% be stuck with paying off the massive world debt bill?

[sirrux] 11/1/2020 08:10

Pro, have you been watching downsizing?

[deanroberthunt] 11/1/2020 08:09

All the other heavily indebted oilers were well up yesterday, the debt free company was flat!

[sirrux] 11/1/2020 07:58

In Africa, they use crude oil for it's medicinal benefits. Imagine that catching on in the developed world! Well it is partly, but maybe could be done a lot more.For hydrogen from oil check out Proton Technologies and the scientific debate. It's a future possibility and having the pipework in place is a bonus. We need to learn how to use oil and water better, to take what we need from those incredibly valuable natural resources in harmony with nature. It will happen, there will be peace if the anti and pro brigades don't end up killing each other first.

[pro_s2009] 11/1/2020 07:54

The simple fact remains - Human population explosion is the sole cause of all the problems on this planet.

If tomorrow 80% of the worlds population dropped down dead, that would be the end of water supply problems, food problems, climate change problems, animal cruelty problems, obesity problems, pension problems - all the problems of today would be gone.

When I see Eco activists supporting this by killing themselves to save the planet - the Climate Emergency will be on its was to be resolved.

Perhaps we can organise a mass Euthanasia at the next Climate Emergency demo ? Gretha will lead the way and jump off a cliff ?

[ayl30] 11/1/2020 07:51

Agree, Rosling is great at explaining concepts, quirky but fascinating. His story of the impact of giving the poor a bicycle and how it transforms lives got me hooked. Just think of the impact also of mobile phones in the poorest communities

[extrader] 11/1/2020 07:40

Hi all,

For an interesting and educational experience, its hardto beat Hans Rosling andhis book ‘Factfulness’ : an analysis of why most things are actually getting better for humanity.

Tying in with muddy 40’s comment , he cites the humble washing machine - and its arrival in his childhood home in Sweden - as the greatest signifier of human progress.

Rosling gave a number of TED talks available on youtube, Rosling washing machine will take you there.

Worth 10 mins of anyone’s time over the weekend.

I promise you, you won’t regret it.

ATB

[sirrux] 10/1/2020 18:56

...oils a great source of hydrogen too. It's amazing how silly the views are on what's good for the environment or not. In a more advanced technological world we should be able to extract what we need from natural resources by working in harmony with nature. It was the stone age people who started issue, that now has people jumping up and down and yanking the chain of not so intelligent politicians, by burning wood in their caves to keep warm - if only they had just chosen to freeze then the issue wouldn't have snowballed into what we have today. We still haven't advanced too far from just burning stuff, but we are perhaps close to a light bulb moment where the chemical composition of what we need is in the oil already - hydrogen, carbon the essential building blocks of life - we just need to learn to use it better. These advancements are underway.

[hashertu] 10/1/2020 18:50

Hyper. I suggest you read the editorial in this weeks IC, which references this publication.

[pumph] 10/1/2020 18:18

I hope that hydrogen cars develop and become mainstream really quickly. Then HUR can extract hydrogen from all that water we keep hearing about..

[muddy_40] 10/1/2020 18:15

Must be near the bottom. That's Hyper Al appeared on his soapbox. He needs to understand oil will be with us long time. Sure modern Europe doing the right thing now we are developed. He would like the rest of the world to go backwards which will not happen. Africans want what we have.Electricity in homes for a start.. whether it oil or coal powered. Then all the cars from Europe head there in the thousands. Governments there are installing windturbines and the like. But not for the EV stations. To get power to homes schools etc.the basics really.

[hyper al] 10/1/2020 17:40

Jamieboy12

Not everybody reading ADVFN threads are investors.

The word on the street is big investors are shifting out of coal, oil and gas.

You can see why if you look at car sales in the Netherlands for 2019 and December 2019. Goodbye petrol. Mid-2020 UK company car tax rules change and will be similar to Netherlands from that date. It's all about economics and Total Cost of Ownership. EV's are cheaper than ICE cars, depreciation on petrol vehicles will be huge if they are no longer economical. Major Shift coming and an investment opportunity greater than the Internet boom.

[jamieboy12] 10/1/2020 17:30

Nope there still plenty investors here I stopped posting as I could be bothered with ngms27 total garbage, so I still read them but they don’t warrant a reply

[chessman2] 10/1/2020 17:26

There have been relatively fewer posts here [except for ngms27 and his water adversaries], on LSE and on the photographer's special website than a few months ago.

I'm guessing that many individual investors have sold or reduced their holdings during that time. Yet we continue to see large trades going through many of which are probably buys although it is of course difficult to be totally sure. Today was another day of such trades. Very few of those trades would have been reported immediately thus most investors are uncertain.

I believe most of the small trade sells are being packaged and sold on to institutional buyers or even potential purchasers. Unfortunately we have over 2 billion shares in issue so it will probably take a while before someone has to declare a holding.

In the circumstances, notwithstanding comments from ngms27, I remain optimistic.

[damac] 10/1/2020 16:58

ngms27 #7728


Here is my interpretation on reading the Stiffel note, and my understanding of it may obviously be wrong but hear it out....

I don't think Stiffel are commenting in relation to any perceived current water issues. Its more about Hur being able to ramp up and use the AM to capacity. The comments they make are in relation to the fact that both wells seem to be producing from one small area and not from along the entire length of the two well bores as was hoped for in the pre production model. The flow rates being achieved have outperformed Hur's expectations but where the wells are pulling from is/was not to their expectation.

Whilst Hur feel that the two wells are flowing at good rates they appear to have concerns that they are only pulling from the one small area which may in time, not necessarily at present, cause issues. The possibility of drilling another two wells elsewhere on Lancaster to tie back to the AM is about Hur achieving capacity throughput on the AM without causing any unnecessary problems at the existing two wells. Its called being prudent, or being 'proactive' rather than 'reactive'. The note makes reference that they have yet to make a final decision on how they go forward, due to Hur still analysing production data. It says they may decide to push on to 20kb/d from the current two wells.

If they had any concerns just now about current water cut coming from the aquifer and not perched water, why would the option of ramping up the existing two wells even be an option?


I have posted part of the Stiffel note below but broken it down into sections that will hopefully express the narrative better....



"However, for now at least we think HUR can't take the risk of going gung-ho (i.e. producing >>20 kb/d from the two existing wells on the Lancaster EPS), because it believes doing so could pull too hard on the reservoir given the wells are effectively producing out of just one small area.

By contrast, what was expected pre-start-up was production from along the entire length of the two wellbores, thus less pull at any given point. Given the stellar productivity, we think had this been the case HUR would have had the confidence to significantly boost production this year.

We see two possibilities for fixing this and fully utilising its production facility (which can produce 40 kb/d once fully debottlenecked). Firstly, production data could persuade HUR that the reservoir actually can deliver >>20 kb/d from existing wells. This would be a great result since it is capex-free - it could be that we know this by the capital markets day scheduled for late March.

Secondly, more wells draining the reservoir we think would give ample headroom to ramp up, but allowing time to drill these and tie in means it's a 2021 event at the earliest, and would cost perhaps $100M all-in.

Fully funded to generate $400M annual CF by 2022. 18 kb/d of production at $65 oil in 2020 we see generating $270M in Operating CF - note, our financial forecasts to 2021 are unchanged today. Even at $50 oil we think this funds the work programme to 40 kb/d gross production (Figure 1 provides an illustrative cash bridge).

The result would be a business generating c.$400M in annual OpCF in 2022, with a more robust production base of up to four wells rather than just two currently, and with the work programme fully under the control of the company without recourse to the capital markets."