b4mbi Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Happier diner said: Accepted yes. But these days they don't dig holes unless they are pretty certain the gold is there. BP drilled a well in 1982 and found gas, so they know it's there. Edited January 16, 2023 by b4mbi 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 And aren't you in favour of leaving the gas in the ground anyway? So (apart from signalling our virtue/stupidity) it has no value, so again it can't cost us anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 Just now, Stu Peters said: And aren't you in favour of leaving the gas in the ground anyway? So (apart from signalling our virtue/stupidity) it has no value, so again it can't cost us anything. Presuming this is aimed at me, no not quite. I'm in favour of finding out what's there, working out what the impacts of extraction are, what the value of the gas is, and then making a balanced decision. But not one whereby the IOM may only receive a small fraction of any value that is present. As I think I've mentioned a few times, I would have profit capped the extraction effort at something attractive but modest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 12 minutes ago, HeliX said: Presuming this is aimed at me, no not quite. I'm in favour of finding out what's there, working out what the impacts of extraction are, what the value of the gas is, and then making a balanced decision. But not one whereby the IOM may only receive a small fraction of any value that is present. As I think I've mentioned a few times, I would have profit capped the extraction effort at something attractive but modest. The gas is there what Crogfa are saying is they need to determine how fast it will come out (perhaps the pressure it is under to audit extraction?) to determine whether drilling is going to be worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Gladys said: The gas is there what Crogfa are saying is they need to determine how fast it will come out (perhaps the pressure it is under to audit extraction?) to determine whether drilling is going to be worthwhile. How much gas? Edit: Or more exactly, how much extractable gas at what cost of extraction? Edited January 16, 2023 by HeliX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 7 minutes ago, HeliX said: How much gas? Edit: Or more exactly, how much extractable gas at what cost of extraction? That’s what they’re trying to find out!! You’re like the anti vaxxers with your anti gas propaganda!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 9 minutes ago, Banker said: That’s what they’re trying to find out!! You’re like the anti vaxxers with your anti gas propaganda!! What anti-gas propaganda? Have you even read the thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 52 minutes ago, HeliX said: How much gas? Edit: Or more exactly, how much extractable gas at what cost of extraction? Which is where the current (or recent current) price of gas comes into play. If gas is dirt cheap and if it's a faff to extract, they might not bother. If it's expensive, then it might be worth the effort. This is what happened a few years ago with fracking and shale gas in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 There's been some behind the scenes shenanigans with Crogga, investor beware. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 Manx company says it's going to extract Manx gas to sell (predominantly) to Ireland without any IOMG funding. It says it will sell the IOM all the gas it wants at a maximum of 80p/therm (possibly less). If successful it will pay significant duties and taxes into the IOM Treasury. Could be £5bn over the life of the well, could be less (or more). Doesn't matter what the costs are, WE aren't going to be paying them. Doesn't matter if the whole scheme is based on fairydust and a line from a fortune cookie - it's not costing US anything. Possible downside: some crabs might have to move and some underwater grass might be trampled. Possible upside: cheap energy for a generation and huge government revenues to build housing, hospitals, schools etc. I honestly don't understand how anyone can sleep at night whilst objecting to this or trying to stall it. 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 1 hour ago, HeliX said: Looks like Gecko have resigned as registered agent of the 3 Crogga entities. https://services.gov.im/ded/services/companiesregistry/viewcompany.iom?Id=pqYXtYkI4huws0FDAsYFvA%3d%3d Gecko tend to do that if stuff gets a bit too complicated for them. Like their business nice and simple and easy. Also a few other possible explaniations. Potentially they might need it to be a 1931 Co for the equity raise. You wouldn't need a 2006 Registered Agent then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 2 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: Manx company says it's going to extract Manx gas to sell (predominantly) to Ireland without any IOMG funding. It says it will sell the IOM all the gas it wants at a maximum of 80p/therm (possibly less). If successful it will pay significant duties and taxes into the IOM Treasury. Could be £5bn over the life of the well, could be less (or more). Doesn't matter what the costs are, WE aren't going to be paying them. Doesn't matter if the whole scheme is based on fairydust and a line from a fortune cookie - it's not costing US anything. Possible downside: some crabs might have to move and some underwater grass might be trampled. Possible upside: cheap energy for a generation and huge government revenues to build housing, hospitals, schools etc. I honestly don't understand how anyone can sleep at night whilst objecting to this or trying to stall it. Because we don't believe the marketing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 1 minute ago, Stu Peters said: Possible downside: some crabs might have to move and some underwater grass might be trampled. Possible upside: cheap energy for a generation and huge government revenues to build housing, hospitals, schools etc. I honestly don't understand how anyone can sleep at night whilst objecting to this or trying to stall it. Manx crabs or actual crustaceans? 😁 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 1 minute ago, Stu Peters said: Could be £5bn over the life of the well, could be less (or more). But this matters, because its finite and we need to ensure we're getting a good price for our finite national resource. Which I'm not convinced the Gov has done. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted January 16, 2023 Share Posted January 16, 2023 1 minute ago, TheTeapot said: Because we don't believe the marketing. We don't HAVE to - it's not like there's an army of others offering gazillions for the contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.