Shell Share Discussion Threads

[waldron] 11/12/2018 12:49

Shell signs PPA with unsubsidised Italian solar projects

By John Parnell Dec 11, 2018 11:33 AM GMT

Share
Source:Octopus/Fabrizio Guerri

Source:Octopus/Fabrizio Guerri

Oil major Shell has signed a power purchase agreement (PPA) for a 70.5MW portfolio of unsubsidised solar projects in Italy.

The five year deal with UK-based investor Octopus is for power from six projects currently under construction in Italy. Completion is expected in early 2019.

Octopus has a total of ten projects in the works with a total capacity of 173MW.

“This is a landmark deal for Octopus as we continue to drive value from our unsubsidised solar portfolio in Italy through innovative partnerships like this one,” said Matt Setchell, head of Octopus’ energy investment team. “Shell is at the forefront of the global energy transition and, like us, understands the importance of clean energy which we are seeing increase in value and importance to energy consumers in Europe and beyond.”

In 2018 Shell has signed a variety of solar PPA contracts including a 15-year deal for 100MW in California and a five-year deal for power from the largest solar farm in the UK.

“For us, Italy is a strategic market for power and we’ve been looking at ways to increase our power presence in the country,” said Fabio Ganzer, general manager power, Shell Energy Europe. “This deal is another addition to our growing renewable power portfolio and we look forward to partnering with Octopus, a key player in the market.”

[waldron] 11/12/2018 08:24

Oil unlikely to go above $70 through 2020, says Moody’s

Written by Allister Thomas - 11/12/2018 7:40 am

Prices will "settle" thanks to recent production cuts from OPEC, according to Moody's
Sign up to our daily newsletter
Subscribe TodayPackages from £10 per monthPackages from £10 per month

Brent crude is unlikely to go above $70 a barrel through 2020, according to US credit rating agency and financial analyst Moody’s.

In a new investor report, the firm said prices will “settle” between $50 and $70.

Moody’s said recent volatility, which has seen the price dip by around ten dollars in the last month, reflects concerns about a weakening global economy and higher production from Saudi Arabia and Russia.

However the firm also stated the recent output cut of 1.2million barrels per day from Opec will “contribute to a more balanced global supply and demand” which will stabilise prices.

Moody’s gave a “stable” outlook to the oil and gas sector due to increased focus on investments to boost production.

[waldron] 11/12/2018 07:59

I had thought the premium was more do with the rdsb dividend withholding tax advantage

If anything, i would expect the rdsb premium to increase after divi pay day if rdsb buybacks are planned

[fjgooner] 11/12/2018 07:50

Indeed. And rdsa and rdsb could reach parity today. Presumably thereafter the buybacks would be spread equally over both classes.

[waldron] 10/12/2018 19:28

waldron
24 Nov '18 - 09:39 - 1395 of 1409 Edit
0 6 0
RDSB WISHFUL THINKING PERHAPS FOR THE LONG LONG TERM

waldron
15 Nov '18 - 08:42 - 3915 of 4023 Edit
0 3 0
waldron
18 Oct '18 - 12:47 - 3704 of 3913 Edit
0 4 0
waldron
16 Aug '18 - 14:34 - 3451 of 3480 Edit
0 4 0
Should be fun to chalk it up BOX BY BOX

2175 to 2275p

2275 to 2375p $$$$$$$$$$WE ARE HERE TODAY$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

2375 to 2475p
2475 to 2575p
2575 to 2675 $$$$$$$$$$WE WERE HERE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
2675 to 2775 by end december 2018
2775
2875
2975 to 3075p xmas 2019
3075
3175
3275
3375 to 3475p xmas 2020

A SLOW CRAWL TO FJGOOONERS DREAM TARGET PRICE OF 3400p which may well be changed if convincingly surpassed before CHRISTMAS 2020


Looks like the 2275 to 2375p BOX has certainly been confirmed

LOOKING FORWARD TO SANTA CLAUS RALLY MID MONTH


what a buying opportunity this brings forth

[waldron] 10/12/2018 19:23

Shell to build new pipeline in boost for North Sea gas The move is part of plans for a major infrastructure hub. Picture: Ian Rutherford. The move is part of plans for a major infrastructure hub. Picture: Ian Rutherford. PERRY GOURLEY Published: 19:04 Monday 10 December 2018 Share this article Sign Up To Our Daily Newsletter 0 Have your say Shell is to invest in a new pipeline as part of moves to increase gas production and reduce costs in the North Sea. The energy giant, together with partners ExxonMobil and BP, has agreed the final investment decision to build the new pipeline to transport gas from its Shearwater platform to the St Fergus plant in Aberdeenshire. The 23-mile link will join Shearwater, 140 miles east of Aberdeen, with the Fulmar Gas Line and is part of moves to create of a gas infrastructure hub in the central North Sea to up production and cut costs. No figure has been been given for the pipeline investment but it is likely to be a significant spend. Steve Phimister, Shell’s vice president for upstream in the UK, said: “This is part of our strategy to grow our gas production from around the Shearwater platform and it underscores Shell’s commitment to maximising the economic recovery of oil and gas from the North Sea. “Through close collaboration with our partners and suppliers, we have been able to reduce costs, simplify the production process and create an important production hub at Shearwater. Fifty years after Shell began working in the North Sea, we continue to invest in projects to deliver more gas to UK consumers for years to come.” The gas will initially be processed at St Fergus before onward transmission of natural gas liquids to the Fife Natural Gas Liquids plant and Fife Ethylene Plant at Mossmorran where they will be separated and exported to customers. The announcement comes as Shell continues to work on its “Central Graben” strategy, which links fields such as Fram and Arran back to the Shearwater platform hub. The strategy will see a simplification of the production process on Shearwater while maximising the value of gas flowing into the system and on to the plants at Mossmorran. At peak production, the gas export capacity of the Shearwater hub is expected to be around 400 million standard cubic feet of gas a day, which equates to approximately 70,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day. Investment in the hub follows on the decision to develop the Penguins fields in the northern North Sea, the BP operated Alligin field west of Shetland, the Fram, Arran and Gannet E fields along with the Gannet Export infrastructure investment in the central North Sea. The Shearwater field, which Shell is the operator of, was discovered in 1988 and first developed in 2000. Last month research funding was announced for a scheme in Aberdeenshire to capture around 200,000 tonnes of CO2 from the St Fergus gas terminal and transport it for storage in a depleted gas field using existing pipelines.

Read more at:

[grupo guitarlumber] 10/12/2018 17:31

DIVI DATES



Payment date December 19, 2018

[montyhedge] 10/12/2018 17:13

2175p my target, if the brown stuff hits the fan with markets, traders have to raise cash, companies like Shell, etc like a ATM to raise cash to pay for losers.

[waldron] 10/12/2018 17:04

Total
47.34 -1.71%


Engie
11.99 -1.11%

Orange
14.495 -1.13%


FTSE 100
6,721.54 -0.83%
Dow Jones
23,953.7 -1.78%
CAC 40
4,742.38 -1.47%


Brent Crude Oil NYMEX 60.90 -1.25%
Gasoline NYMEX 1.45 -2.67%
Natural Gas NYMEX 4.51 +0.56%

WTI - 10/12 17:43:07
51.54 USD -1.66%


BP
509.1 -1.11%


Shell A
2,317 -1.09%


Shell B
2,327 -1.61%



WOW WHAT A SURPRISE, A PREMIUM OF ONLY 10p

sunk into the 2275 to 2375p BOX

[scoots] 10/12/2018 13:44

Sorry, was talking about VOD

[waldron] 10/12/2018 11:12

Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB.LN) said Monday said its U.K. business and partners will invest further in the Shearwater gas infrastructure hub in the North Sea.

The Anglo-Dutch oil-and-gas company said that at its peak, the hub is expected to produce 400 million standard cubic feet of gas a day, or 70,000 barrels of oil equivalent.

The company said this is the seventh final investment decision it has made in the U.K. North Sea in 2018.



Write to Oliver Griffin at [e-mail]; @OliGGriffin



(END) Dow Jones Newswires

December 10, 2018 05:39 ET (10:39 GMT)

[ianood] 10/12/2018 11:08

Scoots - I think you mean to be on the VOD board

[grupo] 10/12/2018 09:12

scoots

not understanding

can you be more explicit regarding what bonds

or do you refer to share buybacks

[scoots] 10/12/2018 08:39

Any views on this repurchase of bonds thing?

[zho] 09/12/2018 12:11

Trump's year in OPEC tweets: How the president deflected blame for rising oil prices

[steve73] 09/12/2018 02:48

Whatever happened to the previous European Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)..? It was all the rage 10+ years ago, but I've seen little mention of it recently.

Just another EU scam I'd guess... as (probably) will the next one be.

[ariane] 08/12/2018 16:14

Shell Oil Executive Boasts That His Company Influenced the Paris Agreement
Kate Aronoff

December 8 2018, 7:00 a.m.

Shell oil helped write the Paris climate agreement, according to a top Royal Dutch Shell executive.

They’re also the world’s ninth-largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions.

The executive, Shell’s Chief Climate Change Adviser David Hone, made his comments at the international climate change conference COP 24 on Friday. Hone was candid about just how much of a hand his company — through their involvement with the International Emissions Trading Association — had in writing the Paris agreement.

The agreement is the centerpiece of the conference in Poland, where delegates are trying to draft a rulebook for how to implement it. IETA is a business lobby comprised of corporations including fossil fuel producers that pushes for “market-based climate solutions,” including at United Nations climate talks.

To hear him tell it, their involvement has been wildly successful. “We have had a process running for four years for the need of carbon unit trading to be part of the Paris agreement. We can take some credit for the fact that Article 6 [of the Paris agreement] is even there at all,” Hone said at an IETA side event within the Katowice, Poland, conference center. “We put together a straw proposal. Many of the elements of that straw proposal appear in the Paris agreement. We put together another straw proposal for the rulebook, and we saw some of that appear in the text.”

Jesse Bragg, communications director for Corporate Accountability, told me, “In some ways, I’m pretty thankful that Shell was so honest about what many campaigners have been saying for a long time: that the very corporations that created this crisis are at the table and writing the supposed solutions for getting us out of it.”

Under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, only state actors can officially negotiate over the text of climate agreements, including the Paris agreement. Unions, civil society groups, and corporations can be observers to that process.

Hone added that he’s been “chatting with some of the delegations” and that the “the [European Union’s] position is not that different from how Shell sees this.”

Article 6, the provision that Shell is taking credit for, outlines carbon markets as one of the chief ways that oil companies and other major polluters can rein in their emissions, allowing them to purchase credits for emissions reductions elsewhere instead of just reducing them directly. Such systems have been racked with controversy and do basically nothing to reduce the local impacts of extraction.

Article 6 (of 29) deals with mitigation, and what both governmental and nongovernmental actors will do to mitigate emissions in line with each country’s “Nationally Determined Contribution,” or NDC. The vast majority of the article deals with so-called market mechanisms — emissions-trading systems (think cap-and-trade) — to allow for international cooperation. Just one part of Article 6 (6.8) pertains to nonmarket mechanisms, which remain undefined.

So why is Shell so invested in market mechanisms?

In a perfect world for Shell and other fossil fuel producers, those mechanisms would be the only government mitigation policies on the table. “The ideal for a cap-and-trade system is to have no overlapping policies … if you really wanted it to work as effectively as it possibly could,” Hone told me after the session, referring to emissions-trading systems generally. “But I’m being a bit idealistic there, I suspect.”

That’s consistent with the positions that Shell and other oil companies have taken on carbon-pricing mechanisms, which many oil companies see as a vehicle for ditching other constraints (i.e., regulations) on their operations. A representative from BP told me last month that a main reason they poured $13 million into fighting a carbon fee in Washington state is because it “would fail to preempt other state and local carbon regulations,” with a similar logic found in the Climate Leadership Council’s proposal for a carbon tax in the United States.

It’s not as consistent with the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which highlights the need to cut 45 percent of carbon emissions by 2030 before zeroing them out by mid-century. Without the massive scale-up of so-called negative emissions measures — a suite of largely untested or prohibitively expensive technologies, such as carbon capture and storage — oil and gas use (Shell’s bread and butter) will have to decline by 87 percent and 74 percent, respectively.

Philip Jakpor, head of media and campaigns for Environmental Rights Action in the Niger River delta, has seen the effects of Shell’s oil and gas business firsthand. The company operates some 200 gas flares in the region that burn for 24 hours a day, despite having been repeatedly declared illegal there. Nearby communities, Jakpor says, deal with rashes, respiratory problems, and disruptions to farms and fishing as a result. They have been fighting for Shell to stop the practice for years. “Shell is gassing these communities out of existence,” he told me. Now, the company wants to be able to sell carbon credits to build infrastructure that would contain them. “The community is not saying make money from this. The community is saying stop the gas flaring,” Jakpor added. Along with 366 organizations across 129 countries, he’s a signatory on the People’s Demands for Climate Justice, which, alongside demanding a phaseout of fossil fuels, rejects several of the provisions that Shell and other companies are pushing to be included in Article 6.

“We have said time and again that the solution[s] are non-market mechanisms. We are against the commodification of the environment. If we allow this, even the air we breathe will be commodified. The way to go is to end fossil fuel extraction. And we don’t want companies like Shell and their cronies crawling all over the place trying to influence the talks,” he said.

For Shell, that’s simply too much to ask. “We’re not going to be at zero emissions” by 2070, Hone told me. “I cannot see that happening. You could be at net zero emissions, but not zero emissions. And you’re at net zero emissions because you’ve got large scale removals going on” — through negative emissions.

“They need us to think it’s impossible,” Bragg said. “They need us to think that we need these unproven and dangerous [and] false solutions in order to get out of this crisis. It’s impossible to see that happening if Shell and others are writing the rules by which we’re addressing the climate crisis. It’s not impossible if we’re having science guide our decision-making, and not allowing the fossil fuel industry to hijack policymaking.”

[ariane] 08/12/2018 14:48

Funny how some must critize but contribute nothing