I3 Energy Share Discussion Threads

[spangle93] 27/9/2021 07:18

Results and Dividend statement link

Production continues to hold up - 9000 boepd average in H1, roduction for the week ending 18 September 2021 averaged 18,741 boepd
Agreed terms with farm-in partners for the Serenity field appraisal drilling programme
H1 2021 dividend of £2.20 million or 0.2 p/share, based on pre-Cenovus cash flow

[brickyrb] 27/9/2021 01:44

Thank you Tony!!

[goodday1] 26/9/2021 19:47

Gl all tomorrow.There is a link within the tweet to register for the webcast.After 15:00 for the next push up for the share price https://twitter.com/i3energy/status/1441386275265601539?s=21

[spangle93] 26/9/2021 07:05

Tournesol - an interesting exchange has broken out on a discussion board... how unusual ;-)

Just wondered if you'd feel like sharing whether your investment strategy has changed as a result of your reading. Like Jim Mellon's efforts in investment in companies focusing on old age, or in plant based meats. Or whether, if you doubt humankind (or at least, political-kind) has the ability to sufficiently change, whether it remains the same?

[1choip] 25/9/2021 23:28

Fand, u talked like a baby. daddy! daddy! So do u rely on cypto to save economy? Do u think all go solar by tomorrow? The day all goes to solar, this company might have transformed into a mega size by then.

[fandagle] 25/9/2021 20:54

Surely folk must be suspicious of the 27th update? For some reason the BOD announced it almost 10 days before the 27th, during that time the share price has climbed! That has not happened before with I3E! Then they said there would be a Q & A session on 27th, with the questions being pre-set no doubt, so no questions could be asked about the RNS,to me it will be a status quo! No F/O update and more confused production updates!

[bountyhunter] 25/9/2021 19:36

That's part of the reason why energy prices are so high, wind turbines have not been spinning much during Aug/Sep. October is usually stormy however so we are not likely to remain in the doldrums for much longer!

[fandagle] 25/9/2021 19:26

With all this climate change has anyone noticed the wind has disappeared for the last three months? Apart from the Rampers on here.....

[bountyhunter] 25/9/2021 19:10

On a one way ticket to the moon? 😉
I guess carbon neutral has little relevance once you have left the Earth's atmosphere.
I must admit I find him a tad condescending.

[fardels bear] 25/9/2021 18:49

Yes that's as maybe, the part of David Attenborough's life is flying round the world huge distances at the BBC's expense and then on his programs telling us that we're not allowed to do that.You can imagine where I'd like to tell him to go

[hoper1] 25/9/2021 15:19

The other problem is that we are now living in an age where everyone wants it all and wants it now, with little regard for anyone else. A good illustration is the so called petrol shortage in the UK. I use my little local garage in a small town in a rural part of the country. Normally there is no problem getting fuel because they charge a couple of pence per litre more than other garages. Yesterday there was a queue six deep for fuel with one old age pensioner not only filling up his big 4x4 but then producing four petrol containers and proceeding to fill them to the brim as well. Apparently people were travelling from 16 miles away to get petrol!
In short, there are too many human beings on the planet consuming too much. David Attenborough once said that everything in the natural world has a price and that we must take only what we need. He also suggested that instead of controlling the environment to protect humanity we should control humanity to protect the environment.

[tournesol] 25/9/2021 14:27

Read Bill Gates recent book. The biggest generator of carbon emissions is cement/concrete. Second biggest is "modern" agriculture. To reduce those requires changing the way we live on a much bigger scale than banning air travel or flash cars.

[dexdringle] 25/9/2021 14:27

tournesol 25 Sep '21 - 11:43

"It's not regarded as politically acceptable to say that we need to reduce the number of human beings on the planet"

Of course its not. Turkeys are not going to vote for Christmas. So what you do instead is engineer a medical emergency (say in a land far away) which you then use as a ruse to inject said turkeys with a substance they think is for their benefit but, ultimately, is designed to control their numbers. Best of all they will thank you for it and will even shun turkeys who reject it. That's turkeys for you (see also sheep).....

[netcurtains] 25/9/2021 14:17

Its not so much over population but rather the richer populations are consuming miles and miles too much.

private jets?
private yachts?
private super-cars?

Perhaps we should ban billionaires?

[highly geared] 25/9/2021 14:14

Sobering but realistic stuff. Objectively, the planet can sustainably support about half the current world population. Humans have been too successful and are steadily consuming their host... Climate change is nature’s response, along with viruses, to balance things out.

[tournesol] 25/9/2021 11:43

Netcurtains

This is off topic, but it is the week-end…̷0;

Carbon generated climate change, plastic pollution and chemical pollution are all problematic and we shouldn’t neglect any of them. They are separate but inter-linked. For example Intensive farming generates high carbon emissions AND over use of chemical inputs.

I am becoming v pessimistic about our collective will/ability to deal with any of the above issues. I just bought a couple of books about how to achieve net zero - one by Professor Dieter Helm which is largely waffle and obsessed with carbon credits; the other by Bill Gates which is extremely informative and is, IMHO, a far more insightful book.

The thing that strikes me about both books is that they do not mention population. I guess they both thought that it was just too hot a topic. It's not regarded as politically acceptable to say that we need to reduce the number of human beings on the planet. Instead the United Nations goes so far as to celebrate population growth and our own domestic and foreign policies do nothing to discourage it.

Given that we are unlikely ever to reach net zero, that means that global warming will continue and all we will achieve by carbon reduction will be to slow down the rate of climate change. It seems to me that in the long term population numbers are the single most important factor in success or failure. Double, treble, quintuple our numbers and the scale of the problem becomes far more difficult. And neither book has anything to say about this fundamental truth. I've never heard any political leader speak about it. It's surely an example of intellectual cowardice.

There is a lot of sophistry about how per capita carbon emissions in the west are a multiple of those for people in developing countries so we don't need to worry about the latter but that doesn't stand up to a few minutes' reflection. IMHO we need to reduce Western populations AND their per capita emissions AND we need to help the rest of the world to stop population growth AND mitigate growth in emissions as they emerge from poverty.

I guess it's a lot easier to call for home insulation than it is to address the growth in the number of homes which is a more intractable problem.

Rant over. I'm going off to glue myself to a road somewhere with the above on a placard.

[1choip] 25/9/2021 10:36

Journey just started and enjoy.

[goodday1] 25/9/2021 09:33

Netcurtains, in answer to your question.Lol

[netcurtains] 25/9/2021 09:02

We need the oil and coal industry for the plastic and synthetic fibre industries. Using monoculture of pesticide sprayed fields of cotton one would have thought worse for the environment than the pollution connected to making plastic, nylon and acrylic - at least on face value that would appear to be the case.

Burning fossil fuel appears to be the main problem not the mining of it - at least that is how it is explained.

Without oil what will vegans wear for shoes?

[ark87] 25/9/2021 08:36

That hedge fund manager is thick shorting anything to do with oil right now. His tiny hedge fund will fail long before his vision plays out . Oil/Gas could both be heading for new all time highs.

[goodday1] 25/9/2021 07:14

Just posted the below on KIST, see how the plonker likes it!-----Do you wonder why it is drifting?The oil industry will be the loser of the energy transition, says Jampel, whose $187-million hedge fund is focused on shorting the most overvalued and vulnerable stocks in the carbon value chain, such as producers, transporters, marketers, processors, and users of oil, natural gas, and coal.https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Bearish-Hedge-Fund-Manager-Nothing-Can-Save-Oil.htmlBe in an undervalued stock eg #i3e.Gl all

[muddyfox0151] 24/9/2021 22:48

Tony will analyse the Facts / figures on late Monday evening ! Good on you Tony , some great free info from this guy .. credit to you ...

[muddyfox0151] 24/9/2021 22:09

So great end to week ! Great finishing weekend.... Onwards next week , disregarding Fannyboy , some good results to come I3e way next week . GLA