Simec Atlantis Energy Share Discussion Threads

[brucie5] 18/9/2020 19:06

Thanks. Much better than coal. Not quite as good as gas, but with added benefit of spared landfill with consequent methane.

[rogerramjett] 18/9/2020 17:25

So for a 220mw coal plant 2.2m tonnes of CO2 will be produced.

For a 220mw gas fired plant 750k tonnes of CO2 will be produced.

For the Subcoal plant 1m tonnes of CO2 will be produced.

Significant reduction over coal. As stated elsewhere it is a 60% reduction.

[rogerramjett] 18/9/2020 16:25

Very detailed about every aspect of Simec Atlantis Energy.

[rogerramjett] 18/9/2020 16:25

The Arden broker note

[brucie5] 18/9/2020 16:06

[...]
[...]
from proactive - won't let me copy the link....

“A high energy pellet that burns as clean as natural gas and is capable of addressing the world's non-recyclable waste problem whilst providing baseload generation and balancing services to the grid to facilitate deeper penetration of renewables is one of the most exciting developments in power generation in the last decade,” he asserted."

Ok, a few ambiguities there: "asserted"; and "clean" as natural gas. Does that mean same C02 emissions per calorific value?

[brucie5] 18/9/2020 16:03

hxxps://simecatlantis.com/2020/06/23/successful-fuel-tests-represent-significant-milestone-for-uskmouth-power-station-conversion-project-uskmouth-conversion-project/

"The bespoke pellet, especially designed for the demanding environment of a pulverized fuel furnace, performed very well in the trials. This result gives us as a company a lot of confidence that the flagship Uskmouth project will prove to the world that coal fired power plants can be converted to use bespoke waste derived fuels and in this way contribute to reducing non-recyclable waste going to landfills as well as contributing to a significant CO2 reduction for power generation.”

Not a precise definition of "significant C02 reduction", but I'm still looking.

[brucie5] 18/9/2020 15:56

muckshifter18 Sep '20 - 15:51 - 677 of 678
0 0 0
The weakness in terms of the coal plant conversion in my opinion is that it doesn't actually reduce CO2 much, it just substitutes a wood product mixed with plastic for coal....
--------------------------------------
Ok, I'd like to know this. I was under impression that it is much cleaner than coal, analogous to gas fired power.

Clarify, anyone?

[tempesttroy] 18/9/2020 15:11

I'm fairly sure that I read the power station itself (while non operational) has a coal fired license/permit until 2024 where it then expires. I doubt SAE would want to import coal for this (relatively minimal) amount of time and in any case, I don't believe it's their thing. I stand to be corrected on all fronts though.

[muckshifter] 18/9/2020 14:51

The weakness in terms of the coal plant conversion in my opinion is that it doesn't actually reduce CO2 much, it just substitutes a wood product mixed with plastic for coal, with the burning and release of CO2 from wood not currently being counted as part of the stations emissions.

That is vulnerable to change in the next few years, I feel. So I hope that if they get approval it is long term, and that they license the technology, for part ownership of future projects, to lessen that risk on future projects as action against global warming accelerates. Hopefully, the income from one or two of these would help in the financing of major growth in their severely underrated tidal and hydro side.

[gbjbaanb] 18/9/2020 14:45

I did check a few things on the website. NRW had passed a planning application for a variation to an incinerator (Viridor) where it says:

The proposed increase in plant capacity will generate approximately 274,400 MWh of net electricity per annum, which will displace approximately 104,300 tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year

(page 9)

The Simec application

(section 13.48)

For the maximum 1,734,480 MWh of electricity that would be exported to the grid by the Uskmouth Conversion Project per annum, that equates to 445,068 tCO2e per annum

so that looks good to me, 4x emissions for 7x energy.

Also the planning application says that if the conversion were not to go ahead, they'll burn coal in it instead (s 13.50) as I presume they have a licence to do that already.

[tempesttroy] 18/9/2020 14:24

That's very interesting Clabburn. Thanks for sharing it. This demonstrates that councils & Natural Resource organisations have to operate within the letter of the law. In other words their has to be a justifiable reason why planning or permits environmental or otherwise cannot be granted. Great to see an example of such a development being granted their local permissions. Bodes well for us I think.

[clabburn] 18/9/2020 13:43

hmcad. I just searched quickly and found a recent approval (Jan 2019) given to Drax for a new 300MW gas plant at Abergelli. hxxps://naturalresources.wales/permits-and-permissions/permit-applications-consultations-and-decisions/final-permit-decisions-for-sites-under-industrial-emissions-directive/south-west-wales/drax-abergelli/?lang=en

[rogerramjett] 18/9/2020 13:10

hmcad. You can find the response to the IED emissions values by Simec to NRW on the application site. Only Monday this week did Simec return the response changing their low to medium probability of meeting certain targets to high probability. This was obviously after further analysis and modelling.

[hmacd] 18/9/2020 12:18

Following from Brucie5 comments, does anyone have a feeling for NRW attitude to such levels of CO2, eg from past rulings ? I could not find any hard numbers for CO2 on the website.

[skinny] 18/9/2020 12:16

Has anyone got a link to the 'other' broker note as obviously Investec are the Nominated Adviser and Broker.

[x54v] 18/9/2020 12:10

Also states that:

"Investec does include incremental MeyGen value in its ‘upside’ valuation which is pitched at 112p per share."

[x54v] 18/9/2020 12:09

"SIMEC Atlantis is “a triple play on sustainability”; according to Investec, which sets a 'buy' recommendation and a 75p price target.

SIMEC Atlantis Energy Ltd (LON:SAE) shares are tipped to treble in value as the renewable energy pioneer continues to advance key projects.

Investec has initiated its coverage with a ‘buy’ recommendation which comes with a 75p price target, compared to a prevailing market price of 26.25p.

Analyst Martin Young described SIMEC Atlantis as “a triple play on sustainability”; monetising end-of-life waste, tidal stream power, and small-scale hydro."

Article in today's Proactive Investors.

[brucie5] 18/9/2020 12:07

Thanks, Clabburn. Sounds like a fair evaluation of risk, for risk there is. I'll probably stick with what I've got.

[clabburn] 18/9/2020 11:58

Hard to say what the reaction to a rejection would be. Safe to say it wouldnt be positive! The share price would likely return to its recent lows and it would be harder for the company to continue raising money. We shouldnt forget they are still in growth stage burning about £4m a year. I think a lot would depend on timing. If a rejection were to hypothetically come a few months down the line, after they have already announced a pipeline of other conversion projects (in South Korea perhaps?) or after Meygen expansion or Raz Blanchard has been confirmed then it may be not be too bad. I suspect the company would contest the decision and would have a good chance of winning on appeal. Investors should be expecting a big equity raise at some point in the tens of millions so they can start to quickly scale up and advance their exciting plans but I am hoping that comes after the share price re-rates to the 75-80p region many are now expecting. As ever, this is an investment where you weigh up the risk/reward. For me its still looking very good.

[brucie5] 18/9/2020 11:23

Clabburn18 Sep '20 - 12:14 - 664 of 665
0 1 0
Yes, since the Hanna announcement which proved they have the capability to get this financed, consents and permitting are the only downside risks that I can see. I think the reason for caution basically stems from the fact that this is a project based on burning waste which will release CO2.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. And that is a present risk. I think it would be a shame, since from what I've read, this creates about as much C02 as a gas power station, while getting rid of waste, and of course, creating potentially, lots of jobs and digital infrastructure through data centres. As such it is an intermediate solution to coal, while we develop green power well and truly underway - including SAE's tidal.

I have 6% of my folio here. Thinking of adding, as I can see the slingshot, but mindful of that risk. That's what I'm curious to know: what effect will a rejection have on the strategy and timescale?

[tromso1] 18/9/2020 11:16

"The risk surely is that permissions are not forthcoming. Then what?"

---

Contrary to that, there's a risk in not investing.

Permissions are forthcoming, the share price rockets and you miss out. Then what?

[clabburn] 18/9/2020 11:14

Yes, since the Hanna announcement which proved they have the capability to get this financed, consents and permitting are the only downside risks that I can see. I think the reason for caution basically stems from the fact that this is a project based on burning waste which will release CO2. With the number of councils and organisations (rightly) declaring climate emergencies you never know if this might lead to irrational decision making. My feeling is that Newport wont want to risk the jobs that this project will safeguard (including those at Liberty Steel) and NRW have been quite clear about what their remit extends to and that they aren't legally permitted to decline a project that complies with all necessary rules and standards.

[dalep716] 18/9/2020 11:04

The risk surely is that permissions are not forthcoming. Then what?

[brucie5] 18/9/2020 10:36

Downside risk is surely the rejection of EP on Uskmouth, however unlikey. How is that factored in I wonder, and what consequences for SAE?

[clabburn] 18/9/2020 08:55

Nice to see this. A 300% rise would be very nice but given what's happened to other clean energy stocks in the past 12 months or so, I wouldn't be surprised if the price goes much higher than 77p when Uskmouth reaches financial close. Patience required for now though! GLA.