Sse Share Discussion Threads

[skinny] 01/9/2022 07:26

'N' - nationalisation.

[cruelladeville] 31/8/2022 20:21

Probably a buying opportunity here?

[bountyhunter] 31/8/2022 19:49

To the same story, clickable...



Interesting, if you were UK based what would you consider to be the best way to invest in GasProm? US ADRs? I see there's a 1:10 and 1:5 as well as a few other GasProm related instruments but can't see anything London listed.

[elbrus55] 31/8/2022 19:15

I sold a large proportion of my European energy shares last week and bought into Gazprom instead. (I am resident in Hong Kong, China so not fully subject to Western sanctions.)https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/08/31/gazprom-shares-soar-30-on-record-profit-dividend-promise-a78688I had expected to be rewarded for an appropriate investment into UK energy assets several years ago which diversified the UK away from fossils fuels and Russian dependence, with its unacceptable sociopolitcial links. I particularly sought SSE shares due to their involvement in offshore wind. Instead it seems now that my rewards will be negated by political sentiment and windfall taxation, so I would have been better off investing in Russian fossil fuels from the outset.This doesn't create a great precedent for European energy policy or political direction. Why should I invest in non-fossil fuel assets / non-russian assets in future?I recommend anyone who has read this far to consider learning Russian or Chinese as I believe the future of the world lies with them.M.

[bountyhunter] 31/8/2022 16:49

Volumes have been unusually high overall this month looking at the header chart.

[bountyhunter] 31/8/2022 16:48

Including a 2.85 million UT

[squintyflinty1] 31/8/2022 16:19

Just look at the after hour buys.

[wad collector] 31/8/2022 14:40

NNNNNNATIONALISATION? or NNNNUCLEAR? Or perhaps NNNNONRENEWABLE..

[bountyhunter] 31/8/2022 10:55

N? Not R then.
Got it, Corbyn, Truss should be a safe bet on not doing that. 'Richy' I wouldn't trust but he won't get in anyway.

[skinny] 31/8/2022 10:42

Probably and the "N" word - it seems pretty indiscriminate and sector wide.

[bountyhunter] 31/8/2022 10:41

Why the decline, is it the fear of a WT again?

[tuftymatt] 31/8/2022 10:30

I am looking at this as I could have got in at 1610 back in June but didn't and kicked myself after!!

The question now, here and in many other decent companies, is will we retest the June lows? 3.5% lower isn't all that much and if the US has another bad day then it could happen tomorrow / Friday. That said it could bounce just as quickly so I may put a buy in order in at 1645 and see what happens.

[wad collector] 30/8/2022 20:01

Do I see an adding opportunity appearing? Though in truth there are a lot of attractive looking equities.

[topvest] 24/8/2022 10:58

Isn't Great Yarmouth the Scroby Sands wind farm? Been out on a boat to visit those. This was one of the first offshore wind farms ever built and is a tad sub-scale versus the rest.

[pierre oreilly] 24/8/2022 09:42

While that is great for SSE Skinny, not so good for consumers. A great guaranteed money spinner (ho ho) for sse.

What you won't see are headlines detailing when the windfarm gets told not to generate (either for already sufficient supply at that time, or the link already at capacity) and the cost of that to bill payers. A high cost for not generating. Constraint payments higher than generation payments. (i.e. the consumer pays for the windfarm to produce zero electricity). The probability of being constrained off is already higher in Scotland, and the probability rises with more wind capacity. And the more intermittent capacity on the grid, the more dispatchable capacity has to be scheduled for primary and secondary reserve to keep the grid parameters within range and avoid power cuts.

So yes, with grid payments as they are massively favouring wind, then more windfarms are great for sse profits, a no brainer. But i think this winter we'll see the devastation intermittent capacity causes to people certainly in bills, but also in power rationing and/or power cuts. And there'll be more coalplants generating this winter for those who'd like to get rid of them - windmills certainly don't!

[superiorshares] 21/8/2022 09:53

Pierre

Agree with you , the Windmill game is a disaster !!!

They don`t create any where near the power the sales rep tells you. Plus
the Tax payer has to subsidise them on a monstrous scale .

I remember watching the ships at Great Yarmouth when they were building the enormous
offshore one there .

Shortly after its completion it was announced it would only produce two thirds of what the Plan originally maintained it would . Perhaps the ambitious electric crop was published to ensure the government and Town hall approved it ?

[topvest] 12/8/2022 19:27

Interesting Pierre. Offshore wind is the only option near term though as nuclear (where we have halved our fleet over the last couple of decades) will take 10-20 years to relaunch. Quadrupling the existing offshore wind farms by 2030 is achievable and lots are under construction / detailed planning stage. Battery storage will help and this is starting to get some momentum with the likes of Gresham House and others. With gas prices at c£200/MWh its currently x2 the nuclear price and x5 the latest windfarm tenders, so gas seems the nightmare to me!

[wad collector] 12/8/2022 17:25

Wouldn't say that Pierre....

[wad collector] 12/8/2022 17:25

Wouldn't say that Pierre....

[pierre oreilly] 12/8/2022 08:54

Wind looking cheap.-----I won't flog this to death and bore people further so I'll reply this once then bog off elsewhere.Please don't make the drastic error of looking at headline CFD or other headline wind prices and thinking those are comparable with e.g. gas generated unit cost. Headline prices are very very very much not the whole story with intermittent generation. The cost of integrating intermittent on a power matching grid, plus all the intermittent specific payments they are given, changes the story massively. Further wind will further increase our electricity price, not lower it.That's all from me on this, I realise it's boring for most people.

[topvest] 11/8/2022 15:27

Wind and solar are starting to look cheap. Offshore wind will have to come to the rescue with capacity expected to 4 fold in a few years. In the meantime Drax (the biggest station) is sitting 1/3rd idle because we refuse to burn coal and we are slowly decommissioning our aged nuclear fleet (down to 5 or stations shortly I believe). We also closed our gas storage facilities because they had been loss making for a few years. It will take years for nuclear to be scaled up. To be honest, I think we should be building onshore wind and solar again after a 5 year stall. no point having empty fields if we can generate power on them and they even look quite nice!
The real problem is gas and Putin.
There doesn't appear to be any solution in the short-term as Putin can turn on and turn off at will.
Be nice if we could step back in time and have oil and coal stations for 5 years. Nearly 40 gas stations is a disaster.

[pierre oreilly] 11/8/2022 14:16

Today's problems go back 30 years. The anti nuke campaign convinced almost everyone that nukes were deadly, so we stopped building them. Add onto that the mass support for intermittent windmills (which exists even today, yet is waining i feel) and that's the cause. The dash for gas was an immediate response, thousands of cheap to build yet expensive th run gas turbines all over the place, and our reluctance to mine our own gas led to total dependence on others, mainly russia, with a pipe going over many countries, each of which could turn the supply off. If that isn't bonkers, i don't know what is. With nukes, we wouldn't have needed much gas, and would have energy independence. We also wouldn't have needed to cover the place with windmills, which are intermittent and need massive subsidies and market bending priorities to shoehorn the intermittent generation onto our power matching grid. It's so lucrative to build windfarms (paid for by you and me in our bills) that they are everywhere, with a high guaranteed profit courtesy of bill payers. There is now so much wind capacity that on a windy day at periods of low demand, ng has to instruct them to turn off. For that, the farm owner get constraint payments (in excess of generation payments, neat eh?) for not generating anything at all.

The story of high bills is only partially due to the gas price - the real cost to bill payers of windmills is now coming through. More windmills (which many see as the solution to high prices) will actually be the cause of further increasing prices.

There's an obvious problem when the wind doesn't blow, but i think the very expensive problem of when the wind blows too much just isn't appreciated yet. (and please no 'batteries/hydrogen would solve that' - that isn't a grid scale solution.

Like them or loathe then, the only way out of this mess is a nuke build, and the earliest that will come online is at least 10 years. Expect 10 years at least of hell for many who simply can't afford electricity prices. A £400 gift this year won't solve anything.