Wentworth CEO sees both capital and dividend growth opportunities in Tanzania's Mnazi gas field Watch Now
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Maybe Adam told him he had had 500 conversations, he could sell hundreds of systems tomorrow if he had them and this time next year Tom my son you’ll be a millionaire.
Let’s hope he is right.
Snake oil anyone?
That is what's bothering me athansius, although on the other hand why would Tom join AFC if he thought he couldn't sell any chargers.
That's 1,042,800 hits since I bought my first shares pro rata, and not a single sale!!
I'd have a better conversion rate if I was selling parachutes made of candyfloss.
By the way, AFC's website supposedly gets 7900 visits a month. We only need a handful of quality hits to convert into orders to get this ball rolling.
we have to have hope that AFC are actually working very hard behind the scenes at finalising some deals . Be it for a 20kw system, a 20kw system with battery, a 160kw system or a number of systems we dont know.
I cant imagine that they are doing nothing they just having nothing which they can tell us today as it is protected by an NDA or several of them with different customers. Once this moves to the next phase (fingers crossed, with lockdown easing this will not be too much longer) then AFC have to notify the market as it has a material impact on the SP.
This is where we are at. Regardless of the potential use of the 20kw system over the 160kw system it should not put buyers off initial small scale orders followed orders for larger more power dense systems.
Customers will always treat carefully around something new that is not well understood. To a certain degree AFC have picked a gap in the market and some customers may not have much choice if they need to comply with emmision rules and become carbon neutral. Grid connection may simply not be an option. Plans have to unfold from somewhere or 2050 will arrive and we will still all be procrastinating over whether to go with a few 20kw systems to get us started before buying a bigger unit.
Let's try and be positive. Very easy to slip into negativity just because individuals expected timelines have not been achieved. Mine have been missed by years.
For all we know, we have had 500 website visits Daz???.. What about the several NDA's and MOU's.. These are more likely to equate to an order than a website visit.
Daz, I get why you feel this way. I honestly don't think its that simple but I do think AFC or on the verge of something big with someone big.
Just a gut feel.
Yes the 20kw system maybe a little pointless but it will not stop sales and getting customers on board as they grow there EV fleet and purchase higher power density systems.
Don't think AFC would need to sell much to be a profitable business as they do not have a large cash burn. Any sales should be profitable and not sold at a loss. After all they have spent 10 years developing the system to be commercially viable. This only increases as more power dense systems become available.
Commitment now from buyers will lead to prioritisation later I would expect.
Fairly sure AFC will be helping potential customers with planning and siting which during lockdown would have been very difficult. This may now be in accelerated mode due to some relaxation.
We have to be a little more patient and remain confident that AFC have developed the holy grail of fuel cell technology.
Any of the 20kw systems bought now could be potentially used for flexibility in the future. The move to EVs, hydrogen production and energy is not going to be cheap or efficient at the outset but I don't suppose oil was when it was first struck. Its only with adoption of the tech that it will start to become competitive. I am not sure that AFC will sell large quantities of the 20kw system (which I believe can be upgraded to 75 or 80kw with battery storage) but they will surely sell them this year as businesses make that transition to EVs.
I believe next year 2021 there will be a 400kw+ system available in the same footprint as the 160kw 40ft container. This is also stated as a liquid cell with a revised stack configuration.
The 20kw may be procured as proof of concept for customers moving to EV that want to try before they buy a much larger charging infrastructure.
Below is the link to the AFC product page where the 400kw + system is identified for availability next June. What do we know about the current status of this ?
For all we know 500 interested parties could have been 500 visits to the AFC website. The longer we go without a single order the more this must prove to be the case. Half way through another year next week and what has been achieved ? A few customers have some samples of Alkamem, one trial of the diesel genset is the progress over the last 6 months ?
The more you think about the mobility point the more attractive it seems - why would you spend money on upgrading the grid that you won’t get back and that ties you to a particular site. Obtaining a mobile asset is a far more attractive proposition as it provides so much more freedom.
There has been a little pessimism regarding the AFC EV charger on this board. It really is a viable solution that any fleet operator should consider to ensure charging requirements can be met.
It may well be that the Hydrox cell S is the solution but it will not stop business commiting to the smallest unit available as they develop their EV fleet and charging infrastructure.
AFC have already mentioned somewhere that this will be the case and customers can upgrade systems as they become available.
It would obviously be great news if there was an incentive to businesses to have the off grid chargers to support a fantastic product designed and manufactured in the UK. Unlike a number of green tech or hydrogen economy businesses AFC have got this far without many if any incentives. I can only think of perhaps one EU grant awarded to AFC.
What they have is a commerciay viable alternative to off grid charging. This will only get better as bigger more power dense units become available.
I cant see any business putting all their eggs in the 20kw system basket or just waiting for the 160kw system to be produced. There will perhaps be a small number of commercial sales of the 20kw system with a view to placing subsequent order for the 160kw system when more readily available. Upscale to larger and more energy dense systems as a fleet grows and infrastructure requirements become greater.
Let's try and be more positive here. We haven't heard much on this but 500 interested parties can't all now have no interest at all. There is much consultation to do with AFC re siting and permissions. Not forgetting CE approval.
13th Monkey. I fully agree. I didnt want to make it look over favourable. Simply demonstrating an average throughout the day.
In your example peak load will be significantly higher and a stronger case for an off grid solution.
Bananaman2 I think it's much worse, you've got the charging spread out over a shift, it'll be a lot more clumpy than that, maybe there being only 4 peaks realistically for a van to anything like 100 miles it'll take 3 hours leading to 3 peaks per shift and not 16 (a flat load scenario), hence it'll be nearer 6 to 7,000 homes. I certainly wouldn't expect any charging in the first or last hour of a shift.
If these were automated and not driven by people you might get away with a bit lower, but not much.
If UPS are ordering 10000 EVs at cost of 100's of millions they will also be looking at the cost of charging and how to do this. Upgrading the distribution network at several sites is not the answer and can take a long time.
They will need to be looking at solutions and clearly not afraid to make the investment.
Its much easier to procure a mobile charging asset than spend substantial amount up grading your supply. Also easier to continually add new units upgrade the AFC system as new improved versions are rolled out. Same as with EVs. Improvements are continuously made but it does not stop customers buying what is available at the time.
The problem is not the tranmission grid it is the localised distribution and the demand rapid charging places on the the network.
For argument sake, let's say that 0.5kw is used per hour on average, per house. The distribution network can provide power locally at this rate and has capacity to deliver more on demand, but perhaps not as much as required for rapid charging. When there are several vehicles requiring rapid charge rates of say 160kw per hour the demand on the network or distribution increases dramatically. For every 160kw charge rate is like adding 320 residential houses to a distribution network instantaneously. To cope with the increase in rate of supply, the distribution network requires billion to be spent to allow the increased distribution rates.
For example, UPS have agreed 10000 electric vehicles with 40 kw batteries ? (Cannot find the data for capacity but competes with mercedes 35kw EV ) . If 2% of these end up running out of 1 distribution centre they will need to charge 200 x 40kw batteries, possibly 2 x per day (range is only 100 miles approx) with a maximum of 30 minute charge rate (perhaps whilst reloading). Thats approximately 8 vehicles every 30 minutes at a rate of 80 kw per hour. So the requirement on the grid would be a constant 640kw per hours hours per day or the equivalent of an additional 1280 homes of load on the distribution network.
If every van operator makes the switch to EVs the demand on the network would be dramatic and as explained before on this board would cost billion to upgrade the infrastructure. Why not have a mobile solution such as AFC ?
Afc have stated that the cost of rapid charging is comparable to rapid charge rates from grid supplies. The benefit being that the AFC system is an asset and can be moved from location to location providing flexible power solutions.
If the batteries are larger such as a Tesla whixh has 100kw battery capacity then the demand is increased accordingly as delivery companies must recharge as quickly as possible increasing the rapid charge rate and further demand on the network. This would obviously increase the range of the vehicle and reduce frequency of charging.
Lots of assumptive figures but shows that an EV charge station does not have to be remote or off grid to benefit from AFC Energy system.
Only if the smaller localised production was as efficient as the larger production systems.
There was an interesting conversation here a while back on how we should decentralise power production to be more local. It’s amazing how much power is lost between the producer and consumer through the grid due to distance - it could be far more efficient if we changed the model.
Maybe the National Grid should use an AFC Micro grid to upgrade their own network ....now that would be an RNS worth having...
The main problem is probably that when someone points out that the grid won’t cope the answer is always ‘how do we improve the grid’ rather than exploring non-grid options. AB has now put that option on the table with the Government so hopefully we will benefit from that.
Autocar magazine has done their fair share of highlighting the problems facing EV drivers ....and the need to improve the EV charger network....i cannot recall them ever giving AFC a mention....lets hope that will soon change ....this is an old article but still relevant https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/analysis-who-will-charge-our-electric-vehicles
My Comment............ 'I remember discussions on here, re the expense of extending the main electricity supply to areas such as some hotel, business parks, supermarkets and similar'
Was referring to those premises car parks.
Regarding difficult to reach locations, I remember discussions on here, re the expense of extending the main electricity supply to areas such as some hotel, business parks, supermarkets and similar.
There was also the problem of the current supply to those premises/locations being too much drain on the grid plus the in many instances, long delays, (several years mentioned) waiting for the upgrading of the infrastructure required.
So difficult to reach includes availability input not just distance.
Perhaps getting some of the easy locations supplied with this kit will put pressure on trickier locations to compete, and if they have no supply then AFC might step in.
What does it mean though? The AFC ev charger is likely to be taken up (I hope) in areas where there is No easy access to the grid. Why go to the bother of cracking ammonia when you can just plug in to an existing supply. It is the more difficult locations they will be targeting, and human nature being what it is developers will go for the easy locations first.
EV charging appears to be a boat AFC is missing. I agree with Doc7 re the long term potential though