Punilux
14 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass Aren't you agreeing with me then? Drax plants a thousand acres in Brazil. Some cowboys clear 900 acres. Brazil gets payout from Norway because it is growing more trees. Just out of interest, don't the mutant bamboo things that Drax use draw a lot more carbon out of the atmosphere because they grow so quickly?
Punilux
14 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass Brazil is an example of why satellites would not work. Quite a lot of their forests are "disappearing" unofficially, to provide grazing land and cereals, You can't just say to Brazil that we are planting a thousand acres of trees so can you make sure that no others are chopped down as this would defeat the purpose. The facts are that the middle classes are expanding, both numerically and physically. throughout the world. Agricultural production in high population countries is probably reducing as many people see urbanisation being more profitable.There is more demand for meat. The only way that I can see the CO2 equation being really balanced is by using the present cumbersome method.
LK Hyman
14 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass Punilux,"Where will we get enough gas from in 8 years time that is politically stable and won't rely on pipelines running through the EU?"There will be plenty of LNG from various sources. I agree that we can't trust pipeline gas from the Rooskies but there's plenty more gas to come from Norway. "If we use existing trees to gobble up CO2 whilst we burn coal then how would this be monitored?"That's a good point. Obviously we can't just rely on Dorothy saying "Trust me, we've planted some more trees out Brazil way". However satellite technology is already being used very effectively to measure the extent of increase or reduction of forest coverage all over the world. It's not rocket science. Well, acksherly it IS rocket science, but we have the technology.LKH on the flybridge
Punilux
14 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass Where will we get enough gas from in 8 years time that is politically stable and won't rely on pipelines running through the EU? Perhaps LKH could indulge me with an answer to another obvious question - If we use existing trees to gobble up CO2 whilst we burn coal then how would this be monitored? At the end of the day, if this were rolled out internationally, it would rely on trust. No doubt Italian scientists would claim that they have grown a variety of tree that grows underwater whilst Iceland and Libya might have to purchase parts of another country just to grow enough trees.
Punilux
14 Apr 2017
Re: Pay Packet Pelleted!! Although I agree with the sentiment there are a number of problems:A) Can you realistically link a bonus to a share price and / or dividend ? Some long term holders are happy to have a lower dividend so as to partly finance the purchase of "distressed" bio-fuel plants. If that causes the share price to dip in the short term then it doesn't really bother me. Statements about trusting the government are of far greater concern if that leads to a sell off.B) If Dorothy were to pack her bags the cost to the company would be far greater than her bonus. C) Does anyone REALLY know how these remuneration committees work? Can a recipient decline a grossly inflated figure without prejudicing other people's bonus' and implying that other directors are incompetent??
gamesinvestor
14 Apr 2017
Pay Packet Pelleted!! Looks like the FTSE 100 Pay Policy Committee is at it again driving up corporate pay packets at stretched companies, ignoring the reality of many of the shareholders dislike for such largesse :-[link] -- Hopefully some day, someone will stop this!!
MNKGV
07 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass Until some of those nuclear sites are up and running Drax is 'safe'. The way things are progressing on that front should see a need to keep Drax running for at least another eight years. After that time, it will switch to gas firing.
gamesinvestor
07 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass two penneth worth -- perhaps I shouldn't for fear of creating a ruck, but here goes.It seems to me a matter of convenience that the so called government bodies are behind the concept of burning wood instead of burning coal.The "fact" is probably more the governments fear of the consequences of having a country without enough power, therefore some kind of economic and environmental justification must be made to the public and the CO2 world police.In the meantime, I suggest they haven't really got a clue on energy strategy and are clutching at straws to justify the lunacy of transporting wood from another continent which is massively more volumous than coal (quite dense innit!!) and then allowing themselves to look good on a world stage as far as climate change actions are concerned. The Nuclear thingy is a disaster, they don't seem to have their act together to set up more cheap gas burners and the installation of windy ridge farms is costing a capital fortune.I'm not in anyway supporting the burning of coal, although the amount the UK would ever burn in a year compared to what China burns in a month is neglible really.But they will press on, Drax might win some more subsidies and it'll blunder along paying the odd divi, but ultimately (and ultimately could be a way off) it will go bust.Games -- Might be better to look to invest in summat that has a looong term future methinks, like cigarettes or booze (sorry that was a poor one on my part)""
Happy Rabbit
06 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass LK,"That's complete horse feathers in my opinion" .... but it isn't a matter of opinion, it is quite simply "a fact" and the really good thing about facts is that they don't care if you believe them or not.You are simply wrong, and even though I keep telling you why you are wrong, you just ignore it. Well, "in my opinion" that is just plain silly.Regards,Happy( I can go through it all again, if you want)
LK Hyman
06 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass MNKGV,"one day, the freak wave will happen."Hmmm. Fingers crossed it doesn't happen before we get to Cape Verde ....LKH on the flybridge tracking steadily east, sea state heav
MNKGV
06 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass LKH If the normal rules of sanity applied to electricity generation I would agree with you. Fact is, so much destruction has taken place on our coal-fired assets that there is no going back to sanity. I pass this madness frequently on the M62 and A1. Since the CEGB died we have lost control and only luck has kept us from a disaster. As we (ex) mariners know , this cannot last forever, one day, the freak wave will happen.
LK Hyman
06 Apr 2017
Re: Value of biomass In4apenny,"Biomass electricity generated at Drax Power Station has a carbon footprint that is at least 80% less than coal power"That's complete horse feathers in my opinion. On a "unit of leccy produced" basis burning wood produces just as much CO2 as burning coal.And don't give me any cobblers about "Oooohhh! But the new trees suck up as much CO2 as Drax spits out when it burns the pellets". Nonsense! Sheer nonsense! Trees suck up CO2 and spit out O2 regardless of whether the CO2 is produced by burning coal or burning wood pellets.The government subsidies for this sad sacka cacka are about as useful as the subsidies that that Northern Irish raver handed out to all and sundry in the "cash for ash" fiasco. Woody has a lot to answer for, my humble. He got it wrong with Allied Minds and he's got it wrong with Drax as well. So there.LKH on the flybridge sauve qui peut
in4apennyin4amil1
06 Apr 2017
Value of biomass [link] the country moves towards a lower carbon future, each renewable power generation technology has its place. Wind, solar, hydro and wave can take advantage of the weather to provide plentiful power – when conditions are right.Reliable, affordable, renewable powerBut people need electricity instantly – not just when it’s a windy night or a sunny day. So, until a time when storage can provide enough affordable capacity to store and supply the grid with power from ample solar and wind farms, the country has to rely, in part, on thermal generation like gas, coal and biomass. Reliable and available on demand, yes. But renewable, low carbon and affordable too? It can be.A year ago, a report by economic consultancy NERA and researchers at Imperial College London highlighted how a balanced mix of renewable technologies could save bill payers more than £2bn. Now, publicly available Ofgem data on which its newly published Renewables Obligation Annual Report 2015-16 is based reinforces the case for government to continue to support coal-to-biomass unit conversions within that technology mix. Why? Because out of all renewables deployed at large scale, biomass presents the most value for money – less public funding is required for more power produced.Renewable costs comparedDrax Power Station’s biomass upgrades were the largest recipient of Renewable Obligation (RO) support during the period 2015-16. The transformation from coal to compressed wood pellets has made Drax the largest generator of renewable electricity in the country. And by a significant margin. Drax Power Station produced more than five times the renewable power than the next biggest project supported under the RO – the London Array. Dr Iain Staffell, lecturer in Sustainable Energy at the Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, and author of Electric Insights, who has analysed the Ofgem data commented:“Based on Ofgem’s Renewables Obligation database, the average support that Drax Power Station received was £43.05 per MWh generated. This compares to £88.70 per MWh from the other nine largest projects.”“Biomass receives half the support of the UK’s other large renewable projects, which are all offshore wind. The average support received across all renewable generators in the RO scheme – which includes much smaller projects and all types of technology – is £58 per MWh. That is around £15 per MWh more than the support received by Drax.”Ending the age of coalDrax Group isn’t arguing for limitless support for coal-to-biomass conversions. And Drax Power Station, being the biggest, most modern and efficient of power stations built in the age of coal, is a special case. But if the RO did exist just to support lots of biomass conversions like Drax but no other renewable technologies, then in just one year, between 2015-16, £1bn of costs saving could have been made for the public purse.Drax Power Station may be the biggest-single site recipient of support under the RO – but it does supply more low carbon power into the National Grid than any other company supported by Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs). In fact, 65% of the electricity generated at its Selby, North Yorkshire site, is now renewable. That’s 16% of the entire country’s renewable power – enough to power four million households.Thanks to the support provided to Drax by previous governments, the current administration has a comparatively cost effective way to help the power sector move towards a lower carbon future. Biomass electricity generated at Drax Power Station has a carbon footprint that is at least 80% less than coal power – supply chain included. Drax Group stands ready to do more – which is why research and development continues apace at the power plant. R&D that the company hopes will result in ever more affordable ways to upgrade its remaining three coal units to sustainably-sourced b
MNKGV
04 Apr 2017
Re: Market reaction No matter what you money men are doing Drax still had all sets on line yesterday. Just pray it keeps going, or you can choose the darkness times !There is nothing left in reserve of this size.
gamesinvestor
04 Apr 2017
Re: Market reaction "what with Allied Minds going rapidly down the gurgler"Allied Minds looks positively regal compared to his $180M (28%) stake in North West Biotherapeutics. Was $12 nw vitually worthless at $0.239." Dec 2015 - Northwest’s share price has fallen 40 per cent in the past three months after an unsigned report was published in October by Phase Five, an entity that describes itself as a research firm — and is shorting Northwest’s stock. The report alleged that cash and shares owned by Northwest had been transferred inappropriately to other companies controlled by Linda Powers, its chief executive.Woodford, who bought the 28 per cent stake ($180M) via his £8bn Equity Income fund and £835m Patient Capital Trust, tried to appoint Elliott Leary, a former FBI special agent, to the board of Northwest in response to the allegations. That move, however, was blocked by the biotech company this week.Although Northwest said it would launch an investigation into the allegations of financial misconduct and appoint a different former FBI special agent as a non-executive director, many investors are questioning why Mr Woodford was invested in the biotech company in the first place.Jason Hollands, managing director of UK investment adviser Tilney Bestinvest, says: “Investors in the Woodford Equity Income fund might reasonably be asking why on earth a UK fund, which is described as ‘offering exposure to companies that can deliver sustainable dividend growth’, has an illiquid holding in a US biotech stock that has never paid a dividend.”Quite!!! He might well question the ethics of positioning a fund as an "equity income fund" and then populating it with not just NWBO but a raft of other either unquoted companies or non dividend paying unprofitable biotechs.Games -- But that's Woody for you -- sure he'll pull it off in the end eh? Well he will just keep launching new funds (3 now) until he gets all the money and......
