We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
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. 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.
The startup capacity of the electrolyte plant is 200MWh per year (for example) / 6 hours of storage discharge at a total VRFB rated MW size = about 33 MW of VRFB capacity. Example (about 66 - .5 MW VRFB's rated at 6 hours of discharge capacity = about 200 MWh) This can be matched with different size VRFBs and different lengths of discharge times at full power output. Maybe a coincidence, but this aligns well with the initial upgrade of Enerox to produce 30 MW of VRFb's per year on the initial upgrade. Both plants will increase capacity in the future and BE has 1st right of refusal to supply electrolyte to Enerox. Makes a good case for BE concentrating on the African micro grid scenario mentioned by @faramog earlier today. Also aligns with Vametco 1 MW 4 hour micro grid storage currently under construction as a great advertisement.
@ faramog, I dunno if I’m right either but the idea that seems to have taken root on this bb that the ELZ plant completion date is somehow being ducked and dived and steered to fall inline with whatever delays Eskom keep coming up for their BESS projects, even though it’s perfectly obvious that it’s never going to be on tap to supply the current bid round, whatever happens ... and that our future prosperity is dependent on it seems very blinkered to me.
Here is a very recently published reminder of the “Business Model” from the Energy and Mines Virtual Summit 4 – 6 May 2021
Developing hybrid solar and battery systems is aligned with Bushveld’s overarching strategy of an integrated vanadium company.
For me that “overarching strategy” means Mini- Grids!
And yes, I believe that is exactly what MN has been intensely and personally involved with ... getting this side of the business off the ground.
You will remember they recently advertised for a manager to take all this side of the business on, for me that means MN has virtually finished putting the building the blocks in place as a director ... and can now hand over his baby, step back ... and watch the whole Mini- Grid business she- bang get ready for lift off. Although I understand it, I’m not in the least concerned about the so called poor comms because their was never anyway an exercise such with a zillion loose ends to be tied up, could be simplified and explained to the market ... until to starts to happen!
It’s just an opinion, I may well be wrong.
https://cdn-api.swapcard.com/public/files/1690b0e4b8ae4e949730d701366100e0.pdf
https://www.bushveldenergy.com/company/
Their website says it all regarding Africa as a whole is the target.
'Bushveld Energy aims to transform Africa by addressing the continent’s greatest obstacle to faster growth and industrialisation: Reliable Electricity Supply''
'Lower the investments required by electricity grids from African governments and utilities.'
You only need to read through the job vacancies at BMN/BE over the last year to get an idea of what's going to happen.
"I think BE will become the main procurement vehicle for the whole Africa continental mini- grid market."
That would go some way to filling the void of what is MN doing .... there does seem a lot of quiet goings on .... no idea if you are right @Lindon, but that would fit with the strategic vision
Thanks Lindon. I initially thought along the same lines, BE for Africa. It demonstrates potential demand in any case. It just has to start, and hopefully soon.
I agree, having revised what has been said by the company, and looked at developments, say the imminent news re the Oxford Superhub (VERL is providing electrolyte for that VRF battery is it not?) and the real possibility of further spin-offs there, but more the enormous potential of min-grid roll-out in developing countries.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032121003269
Lindon that is a very interesting post. I have no idea if your conclusions are correct but they are very plausible. Certainly offers a very profitable future for BE in my opinion.
Ben, I’ve never gone along with the idea that the chemical plant is in anyway tied into the Eskom BESS projects. The idea that’s it’s being delayed alongside the BESS delays is wrong Imo, and it is only my opinion, that the company’s main long term focus is not on the large BESS type contracts, other than as a miner supplying Vanadium to a consortium if wanted.
Again, ONLY my opinion, but I believe the mini-grid market, NOT just for S.A. but for the whole of the African continent, which includes well over 50 countries is where BE together with Enerox is what they are focused on. It has all the potential to be a huge, stable and very lucrative on-going market for years to come.
Anything the company gets by way of suppling large SA BESS type contracts or any IES or other global outside projects will, imo, be just a sideline to the the main SA mini- grid market.
I think BE will become the main procurement vehicle for the whole Africa continental mini- grid market.
well .. VERL is the jointly owned rental arm ... then there is BE and all the value add they will do in system sales .. so I rather think 'gobbling up' will not happen - there is a strong imperative to sell into SA and Africa - at commercial prices mind
Developed World - I should have said. Got to include China in this.
Yeah, see where you are going. I just think that the Western World are going to jump start this and gobble up supply before Africa gets a look in (as usual).
Ben - Eskom is for the most part vanadium supply only really for us - the real money is mini-grid when factories or municipal regions put up solar and need to store and balance it using storage - that is where rental will be such a winner as Capex will be a lot lower.
I think what Lindon (and others) have got at is the 200MW initial capacity of the electrolyte plant may well end up largely in Rental-land .. and I agree. Does not stop purchases, but the market is 1-10mw systems really dotted all over Africa.
That would be practically 100% local content - a vote winner/job creator. Personally, I see Eskom as noise for headlines - Eskom want to deal with large players and Bushveld is just a part of one consortium
@Lindon, that is interesting, why do you say that? Re – most lucrative bit. Can you expand?
The electrolyte plant is going under the umbrella of BMN and not BE. What is BE’s role now? Is it going to offer consultancy, project management, building, or maintenance services? It was supposed to be a vehicle to generate VFRB interest, but the Chinese, IES and Enerox have the potential to tie up all future capacity for years. So is there still a need for it?
50% ownership of the plant is with the IDC. So that is half the profits from any mark up on the electrolyte. Is that deal with strings, does anyone know? Can we buy them out?
@Pickler, your understanding concerning ‘local content’ is basically correct. The main puzzling aspect about the Electrolyte plant is the published timescale differentials between the projected ‘go live’ dates for the current round of BESS projects (late next spring/early summer) and BMN’s projected ‘go live date for its plant (3rd qtr next yr). Also even when is does start producing its projected initial capacity, its an annualised maximum figure, not an instant one!
If the BESS projects get delayed til 2023 then we might stand more of a chance of supplying a reasonable amount of electrolyte by then, but not sure how a plant with such a limited initial production capacity is also expected to supply dozens of local mini-grid projects. Things just do not add up.
Which is why imo, the electrolyte plant is not intended to play any part in the BESS projects ... any electrolyte requirements for those will be come from ‘out of country’.
Imo the chemical plant is intended for the mini- grid market which I believe is where the company is being aimed at ... and where we are likely to see the most lucrative action.
Like most people here I am disappointed with the continual delays with starting the build of this facility. However, I have a vague recollection of someone posting on here that this could be due to Eskom. If I remember correctly, part of the criteria for winning a BESS tender was that South Africa had to benefit from some sort of new facility/new employment which had to be created as an effect of winning the tender. Had the plant been already in production, as per the original timescales, then this would not be classed as a new facility post tender award. With the tender process being delayed until June, the electrolyte plant has also had to be delayed so that, when started, it does comply with the tender requirements as being a new facility. I would welcome views as to whether I remember this correctly.