the green monster, page-10

Thanks for the analysis DrP.

People like me would be less p*ssed off if there was a bit less bullsh*it coming from LNC management regarding its "green" credentials. At least you could have a decent debate about whether we care enough to care about emissions or thats just some hippie talk. The government would also have a great opportunity to nail its colours to the mast one way or another.

I took the time to read Peter Bond's presentation to US investors to discover what is so exciting he was telling them that justified this companies market cap growing to an extraordinary $1.7 billion (wow more than BPT!) on production of 6 barrels per day.

I found this slide which is quite familiar because I posted it on this thread not so long ago myself - with some minor variations:




There's a couple of things wrong with this slide that may have been misleading to our environmentally conscious US friends.

1)This diagram needs a proper title. This is a comparison to petrol. The column on the right represents more than double the emissions of petrol.

2) The UCG that has been written on the slide suggests that UCG implies carbon capture and storage. This is a common misconception that UCG boosters never bother to correct. I admit to believing it myself for a while but its not true. UCG is more or less the same as surface gasification in emissions terms. The "advantage" is you can access coal seams that would be uneconomic to mine. In greenhouse terms this isn't an advantage at all - carbon left in the ground in solid form is not a problem.

3) Carbon capture and storage has never been proven technically or commercially viable by anyone. If it were proved possible, then it would have to be implemented separately at some cost. The assumption that this will automatically happen is the big lie here. Or if its not then where do we find it Linc's cost assumptions? Where is the evidence of their ability to do this when no other project in the world has managed it?

Here are my suggested revisions for Peter Bond's next roadshow. Wonder if the investors would still be as happy to buy up if they knew that what they want to produce is going in the opposite direction to what most of the world is trying to achieve?



If I hear the word ultra-clean mentioned again I'll throw up.