Jeg tror mere det er okseflaget, de hiver langt.

Er dette uttrykk for stor frustrasjon fra Binnion?
.......

BINNION: Canada’s approach to energy fails allies

Author of the article: Michael Binnion
Publishing date: Mar 17, 2022  •  13 hours ago  •  3 minute read  •  

We’ve failed Ukraine and we’ve done a disservice to our allies.

We have an asset many of them lack. We’re a nation awash with natural resources — resources that will be the most desperately sought-after commodity over the course of the coming weeks and months.

However, dogmatic, outdated environmental ideology and our political system have hindered our ability to support our friends and allies when they need it most.

We simply do not have the capacity to produce and transport oil and gas to our allies. And they need it. Now.

Last week, President Joe Biden announced that the U.S. will ban oil and gas imports from Russia. Canada has already taken this step and the U.K. will phase them out by the end of the year. The EU’s plan is a partial cut in imports, however, commentators have noted this may not be possible. They literally rely on this stuff from Russia.

What will be the effect of all this?

Biden said to prepare for pain at home. In Canada, we’ve already seen the soaring prices (and next month’s carbon tax hike won’t help). Yet this may be just the beginning of international petroleum woes.

On Monday, Russia warned the price of oil could go to $300 per barrel, about $120 per barrel more than the previous high in 2008. These prices would be unimaginably disastrous for us, our allies, and the world economy.

Meanwhile in Canada, we sit pretty on our oil and gas fields having spent years trying to reduce our capacity to produce and export our most strategic resource — let alone achieve our own energy independence. We’re not able to significantly increase our output to help our U.S. allies and we simply do not have the infrastructure to transport to the East Coast and ship to Europe.

Why Canada hasn’t built better pipeline infrastructure is a complicated question, but our governing classes’ policies towards petroleum products are part of it. In statements that defy logic, they argue we wouldn’t be in such a bad situation if we had only pushed harder on green initiatives. The federal government has indicated Canada has no capacity to help with supply problems and actually suggested Europe invest in even more renewable energy.

Well, our allies who need our oil and gas now may wish we had focused our attention elsewhere.

In addition, we have provinces working at odds with each other and against our mutual national interests. Some provinces look to increase our capacity to replace conflict oil and gas with lower emissions energy. Quebec has moved in the opposite direction reaffirming its decision to block LNG projects and ban local oil and gas production. Entrenched interests in Quebec benefit from less competition in energy, and the crisis in Ukraine has not moved the government to change their approach.

Ultimately, our political leaders are responsible — and they come from all sides of the aisle.

Federal governments have long been reluctant to work with the provinces, through both carrots and sticks, to develop a truly national pipeline system. We’ve allowed foreign-funded activists to set the policy agenda and drive a ban-and-block approach — an approach that rewards bad actors with cash and punishes Canada for its responsible production.

Practical environmentalists recognize the harm of banning and blocking oil and gas production and infrastructure. In a global industry, it just drives demand to countries that produce oil and gas in less environmentally friendly ways. Instead, we need to focus our efforts on achieving a pathway to net-zero emissions through innovations in carbon tech. We can reduce the use of petroleum products, sure, but we’ll still need them for decades to come.

In the here and now, during this international crisis, our allies need Canadian oil and gas more than ever, and, despite our tremendous supply, we’re in no position to help.

We’re failing them — and we got no one to blame but ourselves.

— Michael Binnion is the Executive Director of the Modern Miracle Network, whose mission it is to encourage Canadians to have reasoned conversations about energy issues

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/columnists/binnion-canadas-approach-to-energy-fails-allies

Virker som Binnion fortsatt møter STOR motstand, selv om vi leser artikler som viser økt interesse for å utvikle gasseksport i Quebec.

Binnion skal bare forære borerettigherne til QG, så skal du se hvor hurtigt de kan få sugerørene i jorden.

Dette er vel et uttrykk for jobben hans, å påpeke det paradoksale og mangelfulle i Canadas energiutvikling, for derigjennom å forsøke og påvirke beslutningstakerne.

Exactly. Lobbyvirksomhet for å åpne øynene til folk.

Ja, men han virker frustrert

@mofi1 hva dersom pilot blir godkjent men clean tech programmet ikke svarer til forventningene og tillatelse ikke blir gitt hva da folkens? Har noen tatt høyde for det? Ser alle roper på pilot men ikke tenker på at det kan bli resultatet, det har i hvert fall jeg tatt høyde for, det kan jo skje at dette ikke blir godkjent iom at dette ikke er testet ut.

jeg mener dagens kurs sagtens kan forsvares med den produktion som Qec allerede har og de brønde som kommer i produktion senere i år
som jeg ser det er Qubec lige nu en bonus hvis det bliver til noget

Glem det!! Quebec politikerne er ligeglad med erstatningskrav som ellers var håbet eller lovet i februar måned glem alt om Pilot.
MB kan forsætte med sit arbejde med overbevise Quebec politikerne de næste 10 år igen 😴😴😴😴😴😴Resultat er 😴😴😴😴

QEC har Kakwa i tillegg, som gir positiv bunnlinje. Og utover året økes produksjonen der betraktelig. Så Kakwa burde forsvare dagens prising alene. Så alt som har med Quebec å gjøre, er bonus. Og den kan med rette utviklingen bli meget stor. Lowlands er ett av de beste naturgassområder i hele Canada. Og infrastrukturen er allerede på plass. Men så har vi First Nations, og hva som skjer der. Blir det status quo, og nei til pilot, blir det massive søksmål i rettsapparatet.

Peter Sellers, vi må ta en ting om gangen, skulle de få godkjenning for en pilot for gass med en nullutslippsteknologi, vil kursen rase avsted. De vet nemlig hvor mye gass det er der nede i bakken, hva som så blir resultatet etter en pilot og følgende av den, er noe du ikke bør begynne å bekymre deg for ennå:-)

@tuja det var ikke det jeg var ute etter når det gjelder FN osv spørsmålet mitt er dersom clean tech programmet ikke svarer til forventningene hva da? Jeg tror majoriteten av dagens aksjonærer sitter i Qec kun av en grunn og det er pilot eventuelt en klekkelig erstatning. For mitt vedkommende så er det kun av den grunn jeg er inne, det er mange andre aksjer på OSE som er langt tryggere enn QEc dersom pilot ikke kommer og kun en lite fair erstatning. Stor usikkerhet i denne aksjen men kan gå høyt under forutsetning at alt klaffer men langt dit tror nå jeg. Med massive søksmål i rettsapparatet da snakker vi år dessverre.

Quebec er vel som tyskerne de stenger av all egen energi kilder og lever lykkelig i klimahysteriet.

Ja

Kan det likevel være oppside her? - Definitivt enorm oppside

Gap i 2,02 lukket, det var tæt på de 2 rent.

QEC gikk fra rundt krona, til nærmere 10kr i 2015, da bill 106 ble annonsert. Da hadde QEC kun 25% av Lowlands. Nå sitter de på 100%. Så om pilot kommer, vil kursen ta fyr nordover. Og de har forsket så lenge på clean tech systemet sammens med Sclumberger, så det tror jeg de har rimelig kontroll på. Men, hver sitt valg. Det er ivertfall meget betryggende for meg at de har Kakwa i tillegg, som gir positiv bunnlinje med dagens energipriser. Da er det ikke dumt at det kommer 3 stk 25% bronner i neste kvartal, samt 2stk 50% brønner senere i år. Summa summarium, stor oppside, begrenset nedside. Og at de er tilnærmet gjeldfri i tillegg, er ikke akkurat negativt.

Når man ser på kursen ser man jo det er tatt høyde for ,dagens prising er jo grei nå men produksjon skal opp og deretter kursen quebec er nå bare en stor gullerot .
Åpnes det skal vi nok se en strek som går rett opp .
Ha en strålende helg.

Robotene styrer showet

The Legault government is sleeping, 52% of the Quebers wants to exploit its own resources especially gas production

Read this:

Canadian Energy Centre

How Quebecers benefit from oil and gas

Fuel, jobs, and energy security

By Mario Toneguzzi on March 17, 2022, 4:55 pm MDT



Ouellette says Quebec should develop its own resources – particularly natural gas – instead of banning development, as the provincial government has voted to do.

A new poll by MEI and Ipsos found that 52 per cent of Quebecers think their province should develop its own oil resources rather than importing all the oil it consumes, while just 28 per cent are opposed to this and 20 per cent are undecided.

“We are always looking for new money in Quebec. We’re saying the health care is expensive, the education system is expensive, then why don’t we exploit our own resources?” Ouellette says.

“There is money sleeping underground and I think with what we see in Ukraine, many countries will say that they don’t want Russian natural gas anymore. I think it’s an opportunity for Quebec to exploit and export our natural gas.”

https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/how-quebecers-benefit-from-oil-and-gas/

Legault can kiss his next term goodbye😁 You do not piss on your voters, he should know

More than half of Quebecers say their province should be more energy self-sufficient: poll

Montreal Economic Institute's CEO says the polling numbers contradict the 'narrative' that Quebecers are only for the production of wind power or hydroelectricity

Author of the article:

Catherine Lévesque

Publishing date:

Mar 17, 2022  • Last Updated 14 hours ago  •  3 minute read

A majority of Quebecers believe their province should be more self-sufficient when it comes to fossil fuels, according to a new poll.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/more-than-half-of-quebecers-say-their-province-should-be-more-energy-self-sufficient-poll

En poll er en poll og har aldri vært retningsgivende for et lands politiske kurs uansett om det er Norge, Canada or you name it. Hvis politikere skulle tatt hensyn til alle meningsmålingene som holdes over en lav sko og stadig forandrer seg, ville de ikke fått gjort annet. Hvis behovet melder seg, kan Myndighetene ganske sikkert kjøre sin egen meningsmåling som viser at flertallet i undersøkelsen er for fornybar energi. Det er bare å stille de riktige spørsmålene, så får man den meningsmålingen man vil ha.

Do not be so sure about this, the politicians changed their minds regarding the extraction of oil and gas, because the opinion polls showed that most were against this.Then they can change their mind again, they only think of being re-elected

There is increased support from voters that Canada should be self-sufficient and if the politicians ignore the wishes of its voters, then they will not be elected

Myndighetene i Quebec har ikke forandret mening. Det er kommet ingen signaler på at den bebudede loven som vil totalforby all utvinning av olje, gass og industriell virksomhet i Quebec vil bli trukket tilbake. En folkeavsteming kan få myndighetene til å forandre sin energipolitikk, men i hvert fall ikke en meningsmåling.

Edited
Så må du snart slutte å blande sammen Canada og Quebec.

Nonsense Profit Hunter

The poll was conducted in Quebec. It shows a clear poll progress for oil and gas extraction and more will come with these oil prices

Read the article it's in Quebec!

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/more-than-half-of-quebecers-say-their-province-should-be-more-energy-self-sufficient-poll

Veldig interessant Youtube podcast / intervju om undersøkelsen som ble sluppet i går. Denne bør alle få med seg.
https://youtu.be/EpxC40id2N0

MARCH 17, 2022
GABRIEL GIGUÈREMIGUEL OUELLETTE
Hydrocarbons in Quebec: An Ill-Advised Ban


Economic Note on how the government is undermining Quebec’s economic development potential as well as its role in the global energy transition

According to the authors of this publication, the Quebec government’s tabling of Bill 21 aiming to ban the exploration and production of hydrocarbons will hurt the province’s economic development potential and undermine its role in reducing global greenhouse gas emissions.

* * *

This Economic Note was prepared by Gabriel Giguère, Public Policy Analyst at the MEI, and Miguel Ouellette, Director of Operations and Economist at the MEI. The MEI’s Energy Series aims to examine the economic impact of the development of various energy sources and to challenge the myths and unrealistic proposals related to this important field of activity.

The Quebec government’s tabling of Bill 21(1) aiming to ban the exploration and production of hydrocarbons will hurt the province’s economic development potential and undermine its role in reducing global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. While the federal government is not preventing the development of the oil and gas sector,(2) which allows entrepreneurs to stimulate the Canadian economy, the provincial political parties represented on the Agriculture, Fisheries, Energy and Natural Resources Committee unanimously endorse(3) this law, and by extension, the expropriation of oil and gas companies, ignoring both the province’s energy needs and respect for private property.

Energy Needs

Quebec’s energy needs are considerable, but successive political decisions have ensured that there is no hydrocarbon development or exploration in the province.(4) And as Quebec develops neither natural gas nor oil, the province depends exclusively on imports.(5)

The Quebec population’s oil needs make up an important part of its energy needs. Oil imports related to the province’s supply and use for 2019, namely before pandemic-related reductions in demand, amounted to over 202,000 barrels per day, on average.(6)

Moreover, natural gas also accounts for a significant share of the energy consumed in Quebec (13%).(7) As the province does not produce natural gas commercially,(8) despite substantial reserves,(9) this resource is imported, along with oil, mainly from Western Canada and the United States,(10) for several billion dollars a year(11) (see Figure 1). Natural gas consumption in the province for the year 2021 amounted to more than 6.1 billion cubic metres, for an approximate cost of over one billion dollars.(12) Given such energy needs, the Quebec government’s current policies are inadequate: The recoverable natural gas resources in the St. Lawrence Valley alone would be sufficient to meet domestic demand for at least 40 years.(13)

Overall, as we shall see in the next section, political decisions regarding hydrocarbons are restraining the economic development of Quebec, and by extension that of the regions where these resources are found. Recent years have been characterized by regulatory fuzziness surrounding the exploration and development of hydrocarbons in the province, culminating in Bill 21, which bans these activities.

The Growth of Regulatory Ambiguity

In 2016, in order to provide guidelines for the exploration and development of hydrocarbons,(14) Quebec’s legislative assembly adopted Bill 106, proposed by the Liberal government, which became An act to implement the 2030 Energy Policy and to amend various legislative provisions. This hefty law grouped together a set of laws, including the Petroleum Resources Act.(15) Its purpose was to ensure very high environmental protection standards through strict regulation.(16)

In 2018, after this law had come into effect, a modification was made to the Petroleum Resources Act in order to ban the development of shale gas in Quebec, which led to a legal battle since companies already held permits and were respecting the law.(17) Such decisions undermine the predictability of the regulatory framework and therefore discourage investment in the sector. Faced with growing insecurity, companies will think twice before getting involved in a hydrocarbon project in Quebec, after the Anticosti Island defeat(18) and the shale gas development ban, to name just those two cases.

The rejection of the Galt No. 6 project is a clear example of an arbitrary provincial government decision. After having received financial support from Ressources Québec in 2017,(19) the project was rejected by the minister of Natural Resources.(20) This rejection is hard to explain, since two deputy minister’s notes had recommended the project’s approval, judging it to be compliant following the technical environmental analysis carried out by an independent engineer.(21) The Court of Québec decided to overturn the ministerial decision, because the minister had not demonstrated that his decision had been made, at least in part, based on technical and scientific considerations.(22) The Court issued a word of warning: Decisions must be based on technical aspects, without which they run the risk of being arbitrary.(23)

Following this decision, the office of the Department of Natural Resources stated that it would table a bill as quickly as possible to ban the exploration and development of hydrocarbons (Bill 21), but maintained at the same time that files would supposedly be treated separately.(24) This bill will have the effect of unfairly expropriating oil and gas companies since they have not broken any law. To compensate the financial and human resources invested by these companies, the government proposes to reimburse a portion of these investments, up to 75% of the costs of closing wells plus the buyback of permits granted in recent years.(25) Any compensation related to potential economic benefits has been completely ruled out, and even ridiculed by the minister of Natural Resources, who characterized the potential of hydrocarbons as a “Homeric tale.”(26)

But governmental opposition to hydrocarbons goes beyond exploration and development on Quebec soil.(27) Indeed, the rejection of the Énergie Saguenay project in 2021 demonstrates once again the uncertainty of projects in the oil and gas sector. This project consisted of liquefying natural gas from Western Canada for export overseas.(28) The goal: to provide a cleaner resource than coal in order to reduce global GHG emissions.(29) This liquefaction plant project in the Sague-nay had the potential for substantial economic and environmental benefits.(30) Let’s not forget that it is rural regions that could have benefited from this project, regions with a per capita GDP that is lower than the provincial average.(31) Also, such decisions create uncertainty for all natural resource extraction sectors.

The government’s position is clearly against the oil and gas sector, but it only takes into account the local repercussions of development rather than all the international environmental benefits, not to mention the economic benefits for the province.

A Bill with Serious Environmental and Economic Consequences

In the coming years, global energy demand will grow, including demand for hydrocarbons.(32) Indeed, global demand for natural gas is projected to increase 30% by 2050,(33) according to current policies, and oil demand 9% by 2045,(34) an enormous growth opportunity that the provincial government cannot afford to simply sweep aside. To ensure the reduction of GHG emissions, natural gas should form an integral part of the energy basket of many countries where coal still plays a major role, as natural gas pollutes only around half as much as coal.(35) In fact, the transition from coal to natural gas in the world, from 2010 to 2018, saved 500 million tonnes of CO2(36) from being emitted, the equivalent of the GHG emissions of the province of Quebec for nearly 6 years(37) at 2019 GHG emission levels(38) (see Figure 2).

Quebec has the potential to play a leading role with its 2.8 trillion to 8.5 trillion cubic metres of natural gas reserves, enough to fill between 2.8 billion and 8.5 billion Olympic-sized swimming pools.(39) The government will have to reconsider its energy policies in order not to prevent the development of natural gas, which has the potential to reduce global GHGs. Indeed, the proven beneficial environmental impacts of adopting natural gas led the federal government to call LNG “clean energy.”(40) The European Union also wants to start labelling natural gas as a natural, “green” resource for decarbonizing the economy.(41)

Quebec’s energy policy is restraining the economic development potential of the province. This potential is far from negligeable given our substantial reserves of natural gas and oil. The development of the natural gas in the Utica Shale in Quebec, which is located in the St. Lawrence lowlands, between Montreal and Quebec,(42) would by itself allow for the creation of the equivalent of 230,000 quality jobs for one year and a total gain in Quebec’s GDP of up to $93 billion.(43)

If Bill 21 is adopted, it will undermine Quebec’s economic development potential as well as its role in the global energy transition. The Quebec government must reverse course on Bill 21 to allow the province to play a leading role in the global GHG emission reduction effort and to develop a strong and resilient economy.

https://www.iedm.org/hydrocarbons-in-quebec-an-ill-advised-ban/

Man kan jo lure på hvem som er betalt av hvem for disse skriveriene.Et unektelig faktum er at det har dukket opp mange «PR-artikler» for gass og olje i forkant av at den nye loven mot gass- og oljeutvinning i Quebec skal vedtas og tre i kraft. Med kjennskap til norske forhold er det nærliggende å mistenke at det står betalte lobbyister bak disse artiklene. Det er mangfoldige millioner som står på spill. Binnion har tilogmed etablert et,selskap med eget navn for å promotere fossil energi.

Myndighetene inngår ikke i meningsmålingen som du viser til.
Som jeg tidligere har skrevet, er det kommet ingen signaler fra myndighetene på at den bebudede loven som vil totalforby all utvinning av olje, gass og industriell virksomhet i Quebec, vil bli trukket tilbake. En folkeavsteming kan få myndighetene til å forandre sin energipolitikk, men i hvert fall ikke en meningsmåling. Det har aldri skjedd verken i Norge eller Canada or just name it.

‘Tror nemt vi kan se kurs 2,50 NOK eller højere inden regnskab på torsdag i næste uge (24.03)‘

Jeg tror du tar feil igjen. Begrunnelsen er at Q4 er et ‘non-event’. Og man ser hvor tungt det er over 2.

Tynnidioten - tror det er du som tar feil. Tilnærmet null nedside her fra kr 2, blir Q4 et nytt positivt kvartal mtp EBITDA som jeg tror, samt guidet økt produksjon i år som tidligere varslet med de energipriser vi vil se ut året, er oppsiden kr 3-4 ex Québec (erstatning eller pilot som gir kr 10-40).

Hvordan Quebecers drar nytte av olje og gass

Drivstoff, arbeidsplasser og energisikkerhet

Av Mario Toneguzzi 17. mars 2022, 16:55 MDT

Til tross for den vanlige misforståelsen, støtter mange mennesker i Quebec Canadas olje- og gassindustrien - spesielt midt i den voksende globale energisikkerhetskrisen av Russlands invasjon i Ukraina.
"(Russisk president Vladimir) Putin har påminnet oss om at verden må fokusere på fred gjennom styrke, før den naive 'Green' agendaen hvor overgivelse av vår energi og naturressurser er misguided, sier Leonard Gorski, administrerende direktør i Montreal-basert mote merkevare GORSKI GROUP.

Han sier at olje og gass er avgjørende for en robust kanadisk økonomi - og kanadisk uavhengighet - hvor rikelig forsyning og stabile priser fordeler Quebec-bedrifter.

Mens Quebec har nesten ingen olje- og gassproduksjon av seg selv, spiller ressursene en viktig rolle i provinsens økonomi. For eksempel er Quebec Canadas nest største marked for raffinerte petroleumsprodukter etter Ontario, ifølge Canadian Energy Center Research.

Ved hjelp av tilpassede data fra statistikk Canada fant CEC at i 2017 støttet olje- og gassektoren over 20.000 arbeidsplasser i Quebec og lagt til nesten 1,8 milliarder dollar til Quebecs økonomi.

Calgary-based Pipeline Giant Enbridge, for eksempel, rapporterer at i 2021 brukte det mer enn $ 79 millioner i Quebec på kapital- og driftskostnader som lønn, stål og utstyr. Selskapet hadde 122 permanente og midlertidige ansatte i Quebec i fjor.

Enbridge betalte også ca $ 2,9 millioner i bedrifts- og eiendomsskatt over hele provinsen i 2021.

"Denne omsetningen kan brukes til skoler, infrastruktur (veier og broer), helse og velvære, rekreasjon, transport og andre tjenester som bidrar til å styrke stoffet i samfunnet," sa selskapet.

Mei Economist Miguel Ouellette sier Quebec fordeler når Vesten, og spesielt Alberta, har det bra i oljepatronen.

"Akkurat nå i Quebec produserer vi ingen olje eller naturgass. Vi importerer 5 milliarder dollar per år verdt olje og gass, hovedsakelig fra vest og fra de nordøstlige landene i USA. Vi kjøper alt, sier han. Han peker også på Quebecs fordeler fra føderale utjevningsutbetalinger, hvor høyere inntektsforeninger som Alberta bidrar med midler som distribueres til lavere inntektsstaker som Quebec.

Ouellette sier at det er trickle down effekter i den generelle Quebec økonomien fra de utjevningsbetalinger, som er om lag 11 milliarder dollar til 12 milliarder dollar per år.

"Det er store penger, og det er penger vi bruker for våre programmer. Det er ikke noe vi bare kan si "Åh det spiller ingen rolle, vi trenger ikke det," sier han.

Ouellette sier Quebec bør utvikle sine egne ressurser - spesielt naturgass - i stedet for å forbyde utvikling, da provinsregeringen har stemt til å gjøre.

En ny undersøkelse av Mei og Ipsos fant at 52 prosent av Quebecers tror at provinsen deres skal utvikle sine egne oljeressurser i stedet for å importere all oljen den forbruker, mens bare 28 prosent er i motsetning til dette og 20 prosent er usikre.

"Vi leter alltid etter nye penger i Quebec. Vi sier helsevesenet er dyrt, utdanningssystemet er dyrt, så hvorfor utnytter vi ikke våre egne ressurser? " Ouellette sier.

"Det er penger å sove under jorden, og jeg tror med det vi ser i Ukraina, mange land vil si at de ikke vil ha russisk naturgass lenger. Jeg tror det er en mulighet for Quebec å utnytte og eksportere vår naturgass.

" For Gorski må det viktige arbeidet med å redusere miljøpåvirkningen av kanadisk olje og gass vurderes sammen med fordelene av næringen over hele landet og rundt om i verden.

"Mens vi motstandsmessig ønsker å redusere karbonavtrykket i alle sektorer, må vi være oppmerksom på at det skyndte misguidede angrepet på olje- og gassektoren ikke er i kanadiske eller globale interesser," sier han.

https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/how-quebecers-benefit-from-oil-and-gas/

Der er jeg faktisk enig med deg. "Det er bare å stille de riktige spørsmålene, så får man den meningsmålingen man vil ha."

Og de fleste politikere er som Værhanen. Snur seg etter hvor vinden blåser.

Legault er vel en av verstingene. Snur 180 grader i olje/gass. Og den siste Totalt forbud mot olje/gass rørledninger, helt til Tyskland kom med en avtale med vest-Canada om kjøp av gass, og Éric Duhaime kom med godkjenning av olje/gass rørledninger på Quebec's jord.

Kursen kan jeg ikke spå bryr meg heller ikkefra dag te dag ,er lov åfølge litt me da

Well said 😁
Elly forstår det aldrig 😂Han har siddet stille i båden i flere år nu.
.

Burde kanskje følgd bedre med, men er det større selskap som kan tenka seg å kjøpa opp QEC? Eit nesten gjeldfritt selskap med stadig aukande produksjon og gode prisar bør vera attraktivt uansett kva som skjer i Quebec? Erstatning/pilot blir uansett ein bonus på dagens kurs.

Der har ikke været snak om opkøb. Det er tvivlsomt, for hvad skal Quebec værdiansættes til? Det er meget svært i et salg.
Vi ved der kommer enten erstatning eller pilot, men kender ikke værdien. Vi ved også at dagens markedspris uden Quebec er ca 2-2,3 med dagens priser og kan stige, når nye brønde åbnes.

Tyndidiot, resultatet af Q4 vil nok ikke overraske, det har du ret I. Guidence kan derimod godt overraske og bringe kursen højere op.

Men igen er negativ ladet indlæg fra en såkaldt aktionær. God weekend til dig.