Redt Energy Share Discussion Threads

[pierre oreilly] 12/2/2020 14:39

Come on tonsil, man up and engage. I asked what i said which made you think i was not a scientist. You said it, lets all hear why.

I have some further questions for you too. Particularly your claim that you are a scientist, and what you think qualifies you to call yourself that. I was thinking more than a pass at gcse science.

btw, no scientist on earth would say 'science means to know beyond any doubt'. and there are several more giveaways which i shall itemise if you care to engage, which you won't.

Still, it's good to see how deceitful those pushing the catastrophic man made climate change are. It's not just you, it's the whole climate arena, fueled by post normal science (the antithesis of proper science).



tonsil10 Feb '20 - 22:48 - 1766 of 1772
0 3 1
Pierre it is obvious you are not a scientist. I am. Science means to know beyond any doubt. It is the hardest of knowledge.

[mikemine1] 11/2/2020 16:19

Thats why they can reduce their headline electricity price as they know, on average, how long the constraint payments are likely to be paid for per year and therefore how much they can balance the 2 amounts to show a favourable price to the public and a great return for their shareholders. Most of the public are unaware of all this when the Government says renewable energy prices are declining they are believed. Of course if you couple this lie with carbon taxes increasing on gas and coal to make their electricity prices higher, then you got a strong argument for renewables over fossils.

[pierre oreilly] 11/2/2020 15:28

Constraint payments are currently higher than generation payments. This has led to a boom in windfarms in Scotland, where they are much more likely to be constrained off due to the interconnector being at capacity much of the time already. Madness - the most profitable windmill is one constrained off as long as possible.

[weyweyumfozo] 11/2/2020 15:20

Slightly off topic, but these pictures of wind turbine blades being buried in landfill are worth a thousand words:

[mikemine1] 11/2/2020 15:10

As we are on to CC which is highly relevant for RED, can someone tell me how 420 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere have such a huge effect on Earth's climate future? Call me simple but if I want to keep all the heat inside my house I might need 1 million tiles but if I only managed to fix 420 then I'm sure they would have little or no effect on keeping the heat in as heat rises and will find it's way around such a small amount of tiles even if some heat was rebounded at it's first attempt. Should my house experience some increasing heat nevertheless would I not think that something else is having an influence. Correlation does not prove causation after all. Answers on a small postcard please.

Back to RED. Apart from RED's miserable failure to win contracts with wind and solar farms, batteries don't seem to be gaining traction in the UK. You would have thought that companies would be falling over themselves to employ storage to be used when their turbines could be producing but were stopped by request of the grid. The answer seems pretty straight forward to me, constraint payments. Why would you spend millions on storage to store surplus electricity and sell when it is needed when you can spend nothing and receive a constraint payment rate that is about or close to the going rate for electricity. The answer is you wouldn't and they are not. Change constraint payments and you automatically make the storage market more attractive.

[pierre oreilly] 11/2/2020 08:06

Tonsil, could you be specific as to what I said indicating I am not a scientist? Tia. I fail to understand why your post addresses absolutely none of the points I raise and just argues a large bunch of straw men.

[greenmachine2] 10/2/2020 23:43

I know that Pierre has a different view to me re anthropomorphic global warming to me, but he does raise some legitimate points in my view in his post. I seem to remember from previous posts that he thinks that high levels intermittent renewables are a real problem for grid electricity stability and I would tend to agree. This is where batteries are touted as a way of dealing with this. This is the one of the theoretical unpinnings for the RED technology.Whether flow battery technology can make inroads to lithium grid batteries' dominance is the big question for followers of RED in this thread.

[tonsil] 10/2/2020 22:48

Pierre it is obvious you are not a scientist. I am. Science means to know beyond any doubt. It is the hardest of knowledge. Like the greenhouse properties of CO2 first measured in Aarhus in the 1860's on a laboratory bench and ever since reproducible even by school age students. Firstly to mirror your points this is a conspiracy theory of science and research that is just laughable. In your world scientists are faking temperature measurements and CO2 ppm measurements. This is just delusional Trumpery and demeaning to genuine scientists. Secondly, Science is about publishing hard data, measurements which can be repeated by other professionals in the field. These days with the multiplicity of sensors and devices in oceans and the weather stations data can be largely gathered automatically. There are now so many teams gathering this data that it it is impossible to fake. If the data does not fit it is still published. I will address climate gate at point four. Thirdly good science does not often get in the popular press. unless you look for it you will not receive it but if you subscribe to the right publications you can receive it even via Google News. Fourthly climategate. You obviously didn't see the recent documentary on climategate where the instigator of the hue and cry against the poor scientists from University of East Anglia, apologised at the end and acknowledged that they were just scientists that had been doing their job. The data that was ignored was tree ring data which had very recently started to behave strangely and diverge from millennia's of accurate temperature 'measurements'. Trees were getting sick and not growing as well in the last two decades as they had been for centuries. So for ignoring 20 years of tree ring data and instead relying on accurate thermometer records these people were pilloried. An investigation exonerated them. Even their accusers acknowledged this. Fifthly there are a few bad scientists, paid by the fossil fuel lobby to muddy the issue and postpone the conversion to a non fossil future. Every day transport stays based on oil is worth $5 billion in revenues so a few million spent on bad apple scientists and paid lobbying is very small beer. Climategate was a major coup for oil. Greta T at least understands the basic science. She knows you can't argue with it. I take it you don't have any grandchildren or you wouldn't argue either.

[pierre oreilly] 10/2/2020 17:15

Couple of things with checking the peer reviewed research tonsil.

Firstly the research itself. Almost all grant money goes on research with a confirmation bias, so research is 50 to 1 backing up the orthodoxy. Very few researchers get money to question anything climate related.

Secondly, if research throws up anything questioning the orthodoxy, then they have a hell of a job getting it published. The research journals don't want to get boycotted by the majority by publishing anything they view as a threat.

Thirdly, on the rare occasions when it is published, it attracts zero press reports, because all environmental journos are part of the unquestionable faithful. You'll never get unbiased reports on the beeb for example.

Fourthly, if you have read the climategate emails, you see that the protection of the peer review process has been compromised to such an extent in climate science that it's now called the pal review.

Fifthly, climate science doesn't follow the norms of science - it follows post normal science, invented for environmentalists, where most of the rigour is simply dispensed with (as in the pal review for example).

Sixthly, truant schoolgirls are never followed or admired in any proper science. A proper scientist would advise going back to school, passing gcses, passing a levels, passing a scientific degree, researching for a PhD and then going onto further research before having anything at all sensible to say on any scientific topic.

[zero the hero] 10/2/2020 16:04

This is a thread about RedT and Batteries, which is associated with helping our resources by using Electricity produced in a more intelligent way. Lets not devolve into a non RedT debate.

[tonsil] 10/2/2020 15:08

You're a bit dim jodrell. Check the peer reviewed research.

[murdo mcsponge] 10/2/2020 14:20

I'm afraid you're sadly deluded my friend.

[jodrell13] 10/2/2020 13:51

What about climate , it’s always been erratic, look over the long period, it’s just a popular thing to chat about, and that silly little school girl , spouting about something she knows nothing about. The old saying is still true, you can fool some of the people all the time, etc etc,

[murdo mcsponge] 10/2/2020 13:27

If we don't all start taking Climate Change seriously, and our politicians too, it's all going to be pointless anyway!

[bluechimp1] 09/2/2020 15:47

Just looking through Gore Street interim results of 12.12.19 (believed to be funding German deal) to see if any update there for the once hyped "mega" but since reigned in deal. All it says is pipeline for Germany of 11mw. No longer an indication on whether it is flow

[zero the hero] 07/2/2020 14:36

As far as I understand Red's aspirations, the focus was the company securing funding from one source, then coming back to the market. I only hoped that for the sake of holders they would include an open offer as it would be easier to cut out PI's altogether.

The company did not inform the market about the Anglian order completing until after the event and any orders gained since suspension will not have been released as it is not "price affecting news" but will be on re-admission. We will all have to wait and see if the company have been sitting around or knuckling down in the last few months.

[jodrell13] 07/2/2020 13:28

Yes green machine I totally agree, it should be done that way to satisfy the AIM rules, but will it?

[greenmachine2] 07/2/2020 12:16

Posted on both threads.As far as I can see if RED is going to have an open offer or rights issue and the sum is greater than 8 million euro, then they are obliged to issue a prospectus. This I guess will be mid March as per the last RNS and I presume Avalon will be part of the prospectus too. It is difficult to see why this can't include the 2019 accounts audited or not audited.

[greenmachine2] 07/2/2020 12:16

Posted on both threads.As far as I can see if RED is going to have an open offer or rights issue and the sum is greater than 8 million euro, then they are obliged to issue a prospectus. This I guess will be mid March as per the last RNS and I presume Avalon will be part of the prospectus too. It is difficult to see why this can't include the 2019 accounts audited or not audited.

[ts0mev] 06/2/2020 23:06

in principle, I agree, but for what gain? "Trading updates" without trading on AIM does seem fruitless.

[mikemine1] 06/2/2020 22:29

Yes, but we don't know that. Even though the shares are suspended, normal trading updates should still be forthcoming IMHO.

[pdoc] 06/2/2020 20:43

No reason for that as you well know Ts0mev. I hope you are not proven to be correct about the timing of the RNS or else people here will think, like I do, that you have something to do with the company and make their own judgment about your continual ramps.

[ts0mev] 06/2/2020 16:56

unless they are holding back on the RNS until trading resumes on AIM, I expect we will not hear anything before the 2019 results are announced. Probably late April.

[mikemine1] 06/2/2020 14:23

We now know our fate will become clear mid March but what we haven't heard of is any substantial progress on the orders front. Have orders been stockpiled dependent on RED being viable and able to deliver or have they simply been unable to sell their product?

[pierre oreilly] 27/1/2020 11:15

Quite a big loss for me, but nowhere near my biggest. I've done really well from shares in general, even after 60 grand went awol in aim. The tech madness helped a lot 20 years ago - so you can take massive losses and still come out very well - i retired early partly due to them.

I sold before the suspension, very pleased to see the latest rns, I was expecting worse. The fat lady hasn't sang yet, so they will probably reappear, if the tone of the rns reflects the underlying situation. If/when they do, and they come back full of cash, then i may invest again.

I thought i judged the cash situation ok here - in fact it probably was, but didn't take into account Scotts big premature people expansion, which ultimately caused all this, imo.