MEE - Metex Resources
- Thread starter bigdog
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mee metex resources
- Status
Always next week Sykes. MEE soon to be renamed Carbon Energy.
The price is currently at a discount of 10.3% to the 1-month volume weighted average price of 68.04c, which may appeal as a value proposition.
From the 13th May up to the 4th June, MEE has been up 11 times and down only 3. The last 6 days the sp has been down, but the total volume has only been at 24,117,968. Compare that to the 5 days prior, days when the sp was up, the volume was at 33,9772,39. I would expect a rise up to the 64 - 66c level on Monday, and some consolidation for the next leg up, leading up to the pilot burn, as well the EGM on the 23rd June, by then they will have tied up:
In summary, it is anticipated that the funds raised will be broadly applied in the following areas:
Then there is having an $8billion company on your side:
Metex Resources Ltd (ASX: MEE) is pleased to advise that Incitec Pivot Ltd (ASX: IPL) has confirmed that IPL is satisfied with the results of their due diligence investigation.
Metex looks forward to welcoming IPL as a substantial shareholder subject to resolution of the acquisition of the remaining shares in Carbon Energy Pty Ltd and the various share issues pursuant to the Shareholders’ meeting called for 23 June 2008, after which IPL will hold approximately 10.7% of the equity in Metex.
Carbon Energy has received all necessary approvals from the Minister of Mines and Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency in Queensland to progress with its demonstration trial of a standard 1 petajoule (PJ) per year UCG syngas module at Bloodwood Creek in the Surat Basin, located 55km west of Dalby in southeast Queensland. The trial site is strategically located at the hub of energy infrastructure in southeast Queensland.
Carbon Energy has identified a suitable site within its coal resource of over 100 million tonnes of high quality coal at Bloodwood Creek. Using conventional estimation techniques, and an average bulk density of 1.5 the resource meets the requirements of a JORC (2004) compliant Inferred Coal Resource. It remains open along strike and down dip and is expected to increase significantly with further drilling. This resource is estimated to contain approximately 2,000 PJ of energy, with some 1,000 PJ being potentially recoverable utilizing CEPL’s extraction technology. The current lack of drilling is the only constraint on significantly increasing this resource, together with the energy contained within it.
The footprint of UCG is small compared with coal seam gas (CSG):
Table1. Energy (PJ) potentially recoverable from 12km² section of the Surat Basin utilizing UCG technology
Total Area 12km², Total In situ Energy (PJ), Recoverable Energy (PJ)
Coal Resource (Underground) 120 M Tonnes, 2400, 800
Coal Resource (UCG) 120 M Tonnes, 2400+22.8*, 1257+22.8*
CSG (CH4m3) 2.175x106, 82.6, 59.5
* CH4 contained within the coal resource.
Based on a 20 year production life these range from approximately 1280PJ’s recoverable by UCG, 800 PJ by underground mining to less than 60PJ from CSG. At A$3 per gigajoule (GJ) this translates as an in situ recoverable value of energy of A$176 million for CSG, A$2.4 billion for underground mineable coal, and A$3.84 billion for UCG.
Carbon Energy are currently proceeding with the construction of the surface and underground components of what will be the world’s first commercial scale, oxygen-injected UCG demonstration trial.
Commissioning of the facility expected in July - Sept. UCG syngas production will follow shortly thereafter as part of a 100 day production test.
The difference between Carbon Energy,Linc Energy and Cougar Energy is Carbon Energy use unique technology and intellectual property developed within CSIRO for UCG, and incorporates aspects of the successful trial in the United States at the Rocky Mountain 1 site near Hanna, Wyoming. Note the word successful.
The Bloodwood Creek demonstration will verify the quality and production of gas in the specific conditions of the coal resource identified within tenement MDL374. The technical director of the Rocky Mountain 1 trial, Mr Burl Davis, is assisting MEE with this development.
The successful demonstration of this syngas producing module will confirm Carbon Energy capability as the world’s first company with the capability for commercial scale, oxygen-injected UCG syngas production suitable for existing, proven, gas to liquids and gas to chemicals technologies. Modules can be combined to meet the gas supply requirements for any power station or chemical plant.
MEE also have their other assets:
If you were to add up all their assets and consider that the test pilot burn will commence in July - Aug and compare that to Linc Energy, who are in a similar position to Carbon Energy, 'they are close to completion on the commissioning of their facility,' Carbon Energy are 3 - 6 months behind. Linc Energy is currently valued at 1.5 billion mkt cap, versus MEE 1.7 million. Makes you think doesn't it, will MEE/Carbon Energy (CSIRO/CEPL) be much higher than today's price in the next few months? Are we looking at the next Linc Energy and if you had 100,000k to invest, which one would bring the greater return? Linc Energy has the potential to run to $6 - $10 on success of their commissioning plant, Carbon Energy..60c to ....?
The price is currently at a discount of 10.3% to the 1-month volume weighted average price of 68.04c, which may appeal as a value proposition.
From the 13th May up to the 4th June, MEE has been up 11 times and down only 3. The last 6 days the sp has been down, but the total volume has only been at 24,117,968. Compare that to the 5 days prior, days when the sp was up, the volume was at 33,9772,39. I would expect a rise up to the 64 - 66c level on Monday, and some consolidation for the next leg up, leading up to the pilot burn, as well the EGM on the 23rd June, by then they will have tied up:
Funding construction payments for the undergroundcoal gasification(UCG) demonstration trial at Bloodwood Creek;
Funding for the cash component of the consideration for the Carbon Energy Acquisition;
Exploration drilling to increase the coal resource at Bloodwood Creek and exploration drilling on Carbon Energy’s other coal tenements;
In summary, it is anticipated that the funds raised will be broadly applied in the following areas:
- Bloodwood Creek UCG trial 50%
- Carbon Energy Acquisition payments 10%
- Exploration 20%
- Administration 10%
- Working Capital 10%
Then there is having an $8billion company on your side:
Metex Resources Ltd (ASX: MEE) is pleased to advise that Incitec Pivot Ltd (ASX: IPL) has confirmed that IPL is satisfied with the results of their due diligence investigation.
Metex looks forward to welcoming IPL as a substantial shareholder subject to resolution of the acquisition of the remaining shares in Carbon Energy Pty Ltd and the various share issues pursuant to the Shareholders’ meeting called for 23 June 2008, after which IPL will hold approximately 10.7% of the equity in Metex.
Carbon Energy has received all necessary approvals from the Minister of Mines and Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency in Queensland to progress with its demonstration trial of a standard 1 petajoule (PJ) per year UCG syngas module at Bloodwood Creek in the Surat Basin, located 55km west of Dalby in southeast Queensland. The trial site is strategically located at the hub of energy infrastructure in southeast Queensland.
Carbon Energy has identified a suitable site within its coal resource of over 100 million tonnes of high quality coal at Bloodwood Creek. Using conventional estimation techniques, and an average bulk density of 1.5 the resource meets the requirements of a JORC (2004) compliant Inferred Coal Resource. It remains open along strike and down dip and is expected to increase significantly with further drilling. This resource is estimated to contain approximately 2,000 PJ of energy, with some 1,000 PJ being potentially recoverable utilizing CEPL’s extraction technology. The current lack of drilling is the only constraint on significantly increasing this resource, together with the energy contained within it.
The footprint of UCG is small compared with coal seam gas (CSG):
Table1. Energy (PJ) potentially recoverable from 12km² section of the Surat Basin utilizing UCG technology
Total Area 12km², Total In situ Energy (PJ), Recoverable Energy (PJ)
Coal Resource (Underground) 120 M Tonnes, 2400, 800
Coal Resource (UCG) 120 M Tonnes, 2400+22.8*, 1257+22.8*
CSG (CH4m3) 2.175x106, 82.6, 59.5
* CH4 contained within the coal resource.
Based on a 20 year production life these range from approximately 1280PJ’s recoverable by UCG, 800 PJ by underground mining to less than 60PJ from CSG. At A$3 per gigajoule (GJ) this translates as an in situ recoverable value of energy of A$176 million for CSG, A$2.4 billion for underground mineable coal, and A$3.84 billion for UCG.
Carbon Energy are currently proceeding with the construction of the surface and underground components of what will be the world’s first commercial scale, oxygen-injected UCG demonstration trial.
Commissioning of the facility expected in July - Sept. UCG syngas production will follow shortly thereafter as part of a 100 day production test.
The difference between Carbon Energy,Linc Energy and Cougar Energy is Carbon Energy use unique technology and intellectual property developed within CSIRO for UCG, and incorporates aspects of the successful trial in the United States at the Rocky Mountain 1 site near Hanna, Wyoming. Note the word successful.
The Bloodwood Creek demonstration will verify the quality and production of gas in the specific conditions of the coal resource identified within tenement MDL374. The technical director of the Rocky Mountain 1 trial, Mr Burl Davis, is assisting MEE with this development.
The successful demonstration of this syngas producing module will confirm Carbon Energy capability as the world’s first company with the capability for commercial scale, oxygen-injected UCG syngas production suitable for existing, proven, gas to liquids and gas to chemicals technologies. Modules can be combined to meet the gas supply requirements for any power station or chemical plant.
MEE also have their other assets:
Uranium: 18 granted tenements that have a total area of 5,413 km² in Western Australia, South Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory.
- Gold: 852,350 ounces attributable to Metex.
- 10 million shares in ASX listed Magma Metals Ltd (ASX:MMB).
If you were to add up all their assets and consider that the test pilot burn will commence in July - Aug and compare that to Linc Energy, who are in a similar position to Carbon Energy, 'they are close to completion on the commissioning of their facility,' Carbon Energy are 3 - 6 months behind. Linc Energy is currently valued at 1.5 billion mkt cap, versus MEE 1.7 million. Makes you think doesn't it, will MEE/Carbon Energy (CSIRO/CEPL) be much higher than today's price in the next few months? Are we looking at the next Linc Energy and if you had 100,000k to invest, which one would bring the greater return? Linc Energy has the potential to run to $6 - $10 on success of their commissioning plant, Carbon Energy..60c to ....?
All sounds very promising, which is exactly why I have invested heavily in MEE.
I've read all about the succsessful progress made at Wyoming (particularly with respect to improved environmental performance) and Dr Mallet from CSIRO is a genius so I'm extremely optimistic that the pilot burn will prove that MEE is the leader in UCG.
Appealingly, after a successful demonstration, international markets beckon... India in particular could deliver more for this company than the relatively small Australian market ever could.
But in terms of Linc v MEE - doesn't MEE still need to locate a GTL technology provider?
The thing that drew me to this concept initially was the fact that although GTL technology is prevalent world-wide, it's never really taken off due to the prohibitive price of gas. But with UGC seemingly presenting a ready source of gas, extremely cheaply, the figures on GTL start to look very attractive indeed.
To their credit Linc have always been very focussed on UGC-GTL, but MEE less so - they seem willing (at the moment anyway) to investigate other potential applications for syngas i.e fertailizer.
I don't doubt that these other options present a strong commercial case, but in the current climate the word on everyone's lips is OIL.
But having said that, I still think MEE is in a very strong position to make a run at this - Linc's background with UGC has not been without issue, and if, as I expect, MEE's pilot burn can demonstrate its technology is superior, GTL collaborators will not be hard to find. Cracking the UGC nut is the hardest part - the GTL bit is easy with the right people involved. I also like the fact that the Bloodwood Creek site can be scaled-up relatively quickly after the trial; post-trial commerical quantities on syngas can virtually be good to go.
LNC has done very, very well, and will continue to grow. But MEE seems a better value proposition - it's yet to boom. It won't happen tommorow, but within the next 12 months I expect MEE capex will have made up some good ground on LNC capex. Waiting for a few key events.
I've read all about the succsessful progress made at Wyoming (particularly with respect to improved environmental performance) and Dr Mallet from CSIRO is a genius so I'm extremely optimistic that the pilot burn will prove that MEE is the leader in UCG.
Appealingly, after a successful demonstration, international markets beckon... India in particular could deliver more for this company than the relatively small Australian market ever could.
But in terms of Linc v MEE - doesn't MEE still need to locate a GTL technology provider?
The thing that drew me to this concept initially was the fact that although GTL technology is prevalent world-wide, it's never really taken off due to the prohibitive price of gas. But with UGC seemingly presenting a ready source of gas, extremely cheaply, the figures on GTL start to look very attractive indeed.
To their credit Linc have always been very focussed on UGC-GTL, but MEE less so - they seem willing (at the moment anyway) to investigate other potential applications for syngas i.e fertailizer.
I don't doubt that these other options present a strong commercial case, but in the current climate the word on everyone's lips is OIL.
But having said that, I still think MEE is in a very strong position to make a run at this - Linc's background with UGC has not been without issue, and if, as I expect, MEE's pilot burn can demonstrate its technology is superior, GTL collaborators will not be hard to find. Cracking the UGC nut is the hardest part - the GTL bit is easy with the right people involved. I also like the fact that the Bloodwood Creek site can be scaled-up relatively quickly after the trial; post-trial commerical quantities on syngas can virtually be good to go.
LNC has done very, very well, and will continue to grow. But MEE seems a better value proposition - it's yet to boom. It won't happen tommorow, but within the next 12 months I expect MEE capex will have made up some good ground on LNC capex. Waiting for a few key events.
Once the technology is proven following a successful trial, I think the sp will rise significantly like Linc Energy. Clearly Carbon Energy is the 2nd major player in UCG technology, but if their newer technology proves superior than they every chance to dominate this market, not just in Australia but globally as well. The potential is huge as they will have the worlds first commercial scale oxygen-injected UCG plant. 
They can practically then take their technology anywhere in the world, particularly in countries like India and China.
What a deal they secured with Incitec Pivot. Their takeover of Dyno Nobel will mean that the UCG technology provided by Carbon Energy will be a feedstock for both the fertiliser and explosive industries. Incitec hold a minimum 10.5 per cent in Carbon Energy. I note minimum, because I believe this stake may of gone up since the initial announcement on 5 th May.
When Incitec acquired Dyno, they held a stake of 13.2 per cent in Dyno from Aug '07 in less than a year, they offered $2.80 per share (at an Incitec share price of $149.36). I wonder if Incitec will eventually acquire Carbon Energy altogether? They will have full rights on the feedstock of fertilizer, but Carbon Energy maintain the rights for coal-to-liquids, power generation and other high-value petrochemicals. It is possible that a similar JV will be done on their CTL generation, with another blue chip.
The climate change impetus, sustained high energy, threat of peak oil and fuel prices and current economic uncertainty have created a far more receptive market awareness of coal’s broader potential as a cleaner energy contributor. Thermal coal prices are now exceeding US$100 per tonne and oil has found a home lately around an unprecedented US$128 per barrel.
The impact of these price pressures is being immediately and alarmingly felt across the cost of transport, production, farming, basic food necessities and household budgets. This is hastening government and industry attention on energy options and delivering new value to Carbon Energy's significant Surat Basin coal assets
SP looks good value, and I'm confident that Carbon Energy will be trading in dollars rather then cents, in the not so distant future.
BUY!
They can practically then take their technology anywhere in the world, particularly in countries like India and China.
What a deal they secured with Incitec Pivot. Their takeover of Dyno Nobel will mean that the UCG technology provided by Carbon Energy will be a feedstock for both the fertiliser and explosive industries. Incitec hold a minimum 10.5 per cent in Carbon Energy. I note minimum, because I believe this stake may of gone up since the initial announcement on 5 th May.
When Incitec acquired Dyno, they held a stake of 13.2 per cent in Dyno from Aug '07 in less than a year, they offered $2.80 per share (at an Incitec share price of $149.36). I wonder if Incitec will eventually acquire Carbon Energy altogether? They will have full rights on the feedstock of fertilizer, but Carbon Energy maintain the rights for coal-to-liquids, power generation and other high-value petrochemicals. It is possible that a similar JV will be done on their CTL generation, with another blue chip.
The climate change impetus, sustained high energy, threat of peak oil and fuel prices and current economic uncertainty have created a far more receptive market awareness of coal’s broader potential as a cleaner energy contributor. Thermal coal prices are now exceeding US$100 per tonne and oil has found a home lately around an unprecedented US$128 per barrel.
The impact of these price pressures is being immediately and alarmingly felt across the cost of transport, production, farming, basic food necessities and household budgets. This is hastening government and industry attention on energy options and delivering new value to Carbon Energy's significant Surat Basin coal assets
SP looks good value, and I'm confident that Carbon Energy will be trading in dollars rather then cents, in the not so distant future.
BUY!Carbon Energy UCG plant will use oxygen instead of air, the BTU of the resultant gas is generally higher. Oxygen is preferred for deeper wells. In shallower coals (<1,000ft.), both the injection and production wells are vertical and drilled in a grid. For deeper coals, directional wells with CRIP technology are preferred. CRIP refers to “controlled retractable injection point” and is a key innovation developed through US research. It allows for multiple ignition points along the path of a horizontal wellbore. AIR is used in shallower coals, but overseas trials have show that UCG can pose a potentially significant risk to groundwater when the trial is at shallow depth, this will not be the case for Oxygen blown - deeper wells, the risk is much lower.
springhill
Make the drill work for YOU
- Joined
- 20 June 2007
- Posts
- 2,555
- Reactions
- 9
Trade No. Time Price Volume Value Conditions
1 182 4:10:34 pm 75.5 3,346 $2,526
2 181 4:10:34 pm 75.5 10,000 $7,550
3 180 4:10:34 pm 75.5 15,000 $11,325
4 179 4:10:34 pm 75.5 1,654 $1,249
5 178 4:10:34 pm 75.5 15,000 $11,325
6 177 4:10:34 pm 75.5 3,346 $2,526
7 176 4:10:34 pm 75.5 11,120 $8,396
8 175 4:10:34 pm 75.5 9,880 $7,459
9 174 4:10:34 pm 75.5 4,000 $3,020
10 173 4:10:34 pm 75.5 5,000 $3,775
can someone plz explain this to me? especially the times of the trades
nice run by metex late in the day, shame the market closed
1 182 4:10:34 pm 75.5 3,346 $2,526
2 181 4:10:34 pm 75.5 10,000 $7,550
3 180 4:10:34 pm 75.5 15,000 $11,325
4 179 4:10:34 pm 75.5 1,654 $1,249
5 178 4:10:34 pm 75.5 15,000 $11,325
6 177 4:10:34 pm 75.5 3,346 $2,526
7 176 4:10:34 pm 75.5 11,120 $8,396
8 175 4:10:34 pm 75.5 9,880 $7,459
9 174 4:10:34 pm 75.5 4,000 $3,020
10 173 4:10:34 pm 75.5 5,000 $3,775
can someone plz explain this to me? especially the times of the trades
nice run by metex late in the day, shame the market closed
- Joined
- 23 June 2008
- Posts
- 1
- Reactions
- 0
A newbie to the forum so be gentle!
Timing of trades is a bit strange, as is the reason behing the late run? I'm with S/hill _ has anyone got a crystal ball on this?
Also does anyone know:
1. How Metex timelines are travelling for the trial burn?
2. Are LincEnergy on track for the next few weeks, ie their trial burn;and
3. WTF are Gulfx up to, no recent news?
G
Timing of trades is a bit strange, as is the reason behing the late run? I'm with S/hill _ has anyone got a crystal ball on this?
Also does anyone know:
1. How Metex timelines are travelling for the trial burn?
2. Are LincEnergy on track for the next few weeks, ie their trial burn;and
3. WTF are Gulfx up to, no recent news?
G
DD - technical question regarding the groundwater issue which may become important in this industry
- do you know - is the groundwater contamination (?) risk lower because they are using deeper wells (ie - below the local GW table), or because of the altered chemistry due to using O2 for the burn.
Any lincs to this kind of stuff would be great - from what I remember they seem to have been pretty coy about providing details of the technology & its advantages on the website - and understandably so if it unique....
but maybe I've not seen the right presentations/announcements.
Great investment report on their website at the moment. If anyone wanted a good summary of where the company is at the moment and what to expect in the future this document will answer a lot of questions. But the crux of it is that it all depends on the trial and a possible resource upgrade which will not be surprising to those who have been following this stock. Nonetheless it is always reassuring to get some research backing what you have thought all along.
- Joined
- 20 December 2007
- Posts
- 745
- Reactions
- 0
southern cross released a presentation - on the metex website
http://www.metex.com.au/documents/ASX300608_2.pdf
they value them at $1+?
edit - soon as i posted this it dropped the price to 76? can you attribute it to me? or maybe the all ords continued to go down?
http://www.metex.com.au/documents/ASX300608_2.pdf
they value them at $1+?
edit - soon as i posted this it dropped the price to 76? can you attribute it to me? or maybe the all ords continued to go down?
- Joined
- 13 June 2008
- Posts
- 14
- Reactions
- 0
Hi Agro and all metex holders,
With all the positive movements and news surrounding MEE, i dont understand why the stock fell 6%????
Southern Cross Equities report issued this week, rated this stock as over $1+ was a promising sign, The merger with Carbon Energy and the name change to be done soon and now with a couple of big intitutions which have became substatial holders should see the SP climb to close to $1 in the near future....
Promising times for UCG, CSG and Metex
I disclose Holdings
With all the positive movements and news surrounding MEE, i dont understand why the stock fell 6%????
Southern Cross Equities report issued this week, rated this stock as over $1+ was a promising sign, The merger with Carbon Energy and the name change to be done soon and now with a couple of big intitutions which have became substatial holders should see the SP climb to close to $1 in the near future....
Promising times for UCG, CSG and Metex
I disclose Holdings
- Joined
- 20 December 2007
- Posts
- 745
- Reactions
- 0
Hi Agro and all metex holders,
With all the positive movements and news surrounding MEE, i dont understand why the stock fell 6%????
Southern Cross Equities report issued this week, rated this stock as over $1+ was a promising sign, The merger with Carbon Energy and the name change to be done soon and now with a couple of big intitutions which have became substatial holders should see the SP climb to close to $1 in the near future....
Promising times for UCG, CSG and Metex
I disclose Holdings
IPL became substantial holder on 30/6
ann just made though i think its old news ...........$10m mou
Seen this on the news tonight
Got to be great for Metex too (Soon to be Carbon Energy)
http://www.csiro.au/news/CarbonDioxideCapture.html
Got to be great for Metex too (Soon to be Carbon Energy)
http://www.csiro.au/news/CarbonDioxideCapture.html
- Joined
- 28 May 2004
- Posts
- 10,819
- Reactions
- 5,114
Metex Resources (MEE) is now known as Carbon Energy Limited (CNX).
For continued discussion of this company please refer to the CNX thread: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11732
This thread has now been closed.
For continued discussion of this company please refer to the CNX thread: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11732
This thread has now been closed.
- Status
