way forward for hab-3 etc

The 21 August announcement said: (in part)
----------------------
Forward Work Program

Following the investigation, the Joint Venture parties are now deliberating on the most appropriate way forward for the project.

The implications of the findings for future well design, material selection and any revision of operational procedures are complex, but are within the bounds of general operational experience in the geothermal industry. Available options will be critically examined and assessed resulting in a revised work program for the project.

These activities will take at least eight weeks, and may lead to a revision of the previously indicated delay of six to nine months in the commissioning of the 1MW Pilot Plant. The revised work program and project delivery timelines will be communicated as they are finalised.
--------------------------

It may be a little picky to point out that that is over 10 weeks ago, and there has been no material advance. I would argue the "Re-validation of Proof of Concept" was helpful from a corporate governance point of view but not for making decisions about value.

Given the SCC was Hydrogen induced, the decisions about material selection should be straightforward - maybe the cost implications are causing conniptions?

Or maybe the decisions about Hab-3 are problematic?

Hard to surmise that everything is ok in the face of silence.

Hope the Coy produces some announcements soonish.

f111